last updated:07 Feb 2003 12: 44 Webword time, or 07 Feb 2003 17:44 UK time
|
 |
|
(Comments added for week ending Sun 02 Feb 2003) | View Other Weeks
|
|
| More Sex for Mastodons | Sun 02 Feb |
| (Issue 0001) This is my first issue of More Sex for Mastodons. If you like it, Ill do more. If you dont like it, Ill quit or try again. Vote now! |
| Sun 02 Feb 18:09 | PeterV | The image shows up only half. |
| Sun 02 Feb 18:10 | John S. Rhodes | Fixed. |
| Sun 02 Feb 18:33 | Anonymous | what the fuck? its riddled with grammar errors and not funny. please don't bother with another one. |
| Sun 02 Feb 18:56 | Adam Greenfield | John, that totally whups a llama's ass! It wards my rock music off!
I nearly spit coffee through my nose. Love it, love it, love it. |
| Sun 02 Feb 20:05 | daniel szuc | Nice!
Voice over starts:
'Stay tuned for the next exciting episode:
Will the users demand a heuristic evaluation? OR will the browser crash because it does not support Flash? ...
same webword time, same webword channel ...'
Music Fades |
| Sun 02 Feb 20:27 | Codex Chaos | I can't say I understand the humor.
Are you saying graphic designers created the first text-only web site and the usability folk created the second graphical one?
In the revamped web site are we to assume the skullish design is crudely drawn? How do I determine that fact given the crudeness with which the two speaking characters are drawn? The skull design looks far superior in comparison. Or is that the point, that usability folk create cool looking web sites? Or is the dialogue unimportant, with the domain name being the punch line?
This comic makes my head hurt. |
| Sun 02 Feb 20:29 | Codex Chaos | Wait, I get it now. The cartoonist is a linux geek and we're all laughing because the cartoon characters are using Internet Explorer. |
| Sun 02 Feb 23:52 | daniel szuc | http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=mastodons
'Any of several very large, extinct proboscidian mammals of the genus Mammut (sometimes Mastodon), resembling the elephant but having molar teeth of a different structure.'
Extinct being the keyword here ? |
|
| Does usability matter? | Sat 01 Feb |
| I place a high value on usability. But I have used some very successful products (and websites) which have very poor usability. And, in thinking over the various processes and criteria which Ive seen used in making buying decisions, usability has been of little or no importance. It appears that usability has only a small effect on the success or failure of a product. |
| Sat 01 Feb 20:53 | daniel szuc | 'But I have used some very successful products (and websites) which have very poor usability.'
Interesting posting. Examples?
There probably are some examples where usability does not form part of the buying equation for products and services.
Initial thoughts are ... if there are 'people' involved in 'using' or 'interacting' with something, there is some element of usability involved.
Unless of course the goal of the product does not require 'ease of use' or the ability for people to complete tasks quickly e.g. some games require people to get lost (but games also require some element of usability for the controls ...)
Dont you love how you can just debate with yourself here ... over to the panel :) I am off to another webword room for a quiet cigar. |
| Sun 02 Feb 09:02 | Mac | 'the central problem with usability is that it is ignored' From Trouble in Paradise Oct 2000
Usability can survive in two ways:
1) Become a separate high-cost, high-profile activity more akin to a marketing function.
2) Integrate itself so closely with the development process that it cannot be ignored. On a tactical nuclear battlefield one tactic is to make close contact with the enemy so that they cannot use their nukes against you.
Option one will result in usability disappearing into market research firms and will be used to update the focus group methodologies.
Option two will result in the absorbtion of usability into the wider field of software design, just like QA and all the rest.
Please note that this my hard-line view, I am probably a bit softer in reality. |
| Sun 02 Feb 10:18 | Frank Lynch | I'm surprised to see people write pieces like this. Part of the problem is the lack of a definition of success. A product can sell and create buzz, and in some people's minds that is sufficient for success. But if you need tech support in order to make it work, that drives up costs, and can mitigate perceptions of success in other people's minds.
Perhaps a program or website can 'succeed' if it is sufficiently unique that people have no alternative; that will make the 'computer savvy' (er, numb & calloused) users force themselves to work with it, at which point they, as bodhisatvas, can lead the less savvy users to nirvana. But I'm inlcined to believe that the product's success (and invulnerability to competitive intrusion) will be greater if the product is more usable. |
| Sun 02 Feb 15:15 | Ron Zeno | Yes usability matters, just not as much as most people assert (and not nearly as much as most usability practitioners wish).
the central problem with usability is that it is ignored
The problem with usability is not that it is ignored, but that it often deserves to be.
Part of the problem is the lack of a definition of success.
Very true, both in terms of the product and the usability efforts for that product. |
| Sun 02 Feb 16:22 | mcw | Usability involves trafeoffs. For example, designing an application or porduct with less usability can mean that more training is required. For a one-off application, to be used by a sophisticated user, this may be the best approach from the standpoint of cost and time. Maximizing usability without regard to other requirements is too narrow. |
| Sun 02 Feb 18:02 | Berna | The definition of success is very important here. To me, products that have poor usability are being used either because 1) people don't have a choice (many MS products) or 2) because people have gotten used to things a certain way (VCRs?).
VCRs vs. DVDs can help to point something out. VCRs were successful products at one point. People had to have one. But as soon as DVDs came along, which offered a little more improved usability, many people went along with it even though the prices were sky rocketing when they first came out. Now, you hear less and less people who use VCRs. True, that most people still can't afford or won't buy a DVD-writer or record their favorite shows on them, but many still prefer to use DVDs over VCRs when they have a choice. I know this is very debatable and that DVDs are not as high in usability as they could be but it proves to me that people are going to eventually start getting away from products that have poor usability when they get a chance.
Bottom line to me is that products poor in usability can survive as long as there isnt anything else out there as an alternative. And as more and more people start to become more aware of usability I think manufacturers should follow so they can stay in business 'successfully.' |
| Sun 02 Feb 23:45 | Laughing Jackass | Once again, John doesn't credit the proper source. You need to say 'Thank you Laughing Jackass' remember? |
|
| Putting A Bad Interface On Things | Sun 02 Feb |
| As for the Web, user interfaces are all over the map. You can never tell how to accomplish a task from one site to another. Worse, the rules sometimes change within sites. Search doesnt work the way you expect it to (if it works at all). Dropdown menus hold mysterious choices, and no one knows where links go. |
| Sun 02 Feb 20:23 | daniel szuc | People are technology overloaded, only have a limited amount of attention to share and are 'task' focused.
It takes more for a UI/design to impress.
Systems that take some of the work away from users allowing them to focus on the task at hand will be applauded every time. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Fri 31 Jan |
| Daniel Szuc says Gong Hei Fat Choi! |
| Fri 31 Jan 23:01 | daniel szuc | Wishing all on webword luck, good fortune and peaceful times ahead. |
| Sat 01 Feb 15:00 | MadMan | Happy New Year to you too.
MadMan the 'Rabbit' |
| Sat 01 Feb 15:57 | Mac | Im a snake, but what is it this year? |
| Sat 01 Feb 20:59 | daniel szuc | Mac goto ... http://www.google.com/ and all will be revealed i.e. look at the google logo at the top of the page :)
Really like the way google make subtle branding changes to reveal a holiday.
Mac for further information on animals and years see:
http://fengshuiwarehouse.net/education_animals.html
I am a rooster ... makes sense as I often cluck around with my chest out inside the hen house ... clucking on about usability and 'chicken feed' *note the double meaning of *chicken feed* at www.dictionary.com * |
| Sat 01 Feb 21:00 | daniel szuc | Thanks Madman :) |
| Sun 02 Feb 09:13 | Mac | Daniel, google didn't work for me as I only saw your comment today.
But the other link was useful.
So it's the 'year of the sheep' is it.
In that case I officially designate this year to be dedicated to usability.
This is a description about someone born in the year of the Sheep:
'A bit of a worrier they also have a tendency to complain about things.' |
| Sun 02 Feb 09:24 | daniel szuc | It showed a 'little black sheep' within the Google logo ... now gone.
- Rooster Boy |
| Sun 02 Feb 13:44 | MadMan | That's correct, all people born in a certain year share identical traits.
Yeah, right.
No offence to the Chinese, but they sure do believe in a lot of superstitious stuff, this being just one of them. My rabbit description is almost totally incorrect.
But hey, let's all rejoice. I don't wanna bitch now. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Sat 01 Feb |
| I like Kottkes online resume. The horizontal scrolling is effective. |
| Sat 01 Feb 19:15 | Matt | Why is it effective? My mouse wheel doesn't scroll it. Clicking my scroll bar to pan a full page at a time just plops me into the middle of a page -- which is totally disoriented -- because Kottke hasn't considered that my window width is different than his. The last thing I want to do is to grab and drag the damn scroll bar bits at a time to view the page. This is quite possibly the worst online resume I've ever had to interact with. |
| Sat 01 Feb 20:10 | John S. Rhodes | Matt, I appreciate your comments. However, I stand by my original comment. The horizontal scrolling is effective for me. I understand that it won't work for other folks. I like the design and I actually enjoy scrolling horizontally in this case. That's rare for me. |
| Sun 02 Feb 10:33 | Joshua Kaufman | I don't mind the horizontal scrolling, but in nearly every case I've seen horizontal scrolling like this, it's use has seemed more of a gimmick than anything else. Yes, I realize his portfolio wouldn't have achieived the same affect if it was a vertical scrolling page, but I prefer ease of use to cheap browser gimmicks any day. |
| Sun 02 Feb 12:34 | Matt | Exactly. It's a gimmick, unless someone can show it's more effective. I find it annoying.
I could code my page to load from the bottom and force you to scroll up. Should I? Will it set me apart from other designers and impress you enough that you remember me? Or will you think less of me and not bother asking me to quote a job? Hmmm. |
|
| Sneaky Toolbar Hijacks Browsers | Sat 01 Feb |
| (Wired) Its a browser toolbar that some swear is doing drive-by downloads installing itself without users permission then taking over their systems and making it impossible to uninstall. (Comments: Ive always been disgusted with RealPlayer. If youre not careful, it will take over your system.) |
| Sun 02 Feb 10:25 | Matt Round | RealOne is awful, avoid it if you can (or opt for a older version which is slightly less intrusive). Quicktime is dodgy too, nagging for upgrades and screwing up icons or failing to play properly on many Windows systems. Anyone would think they're eager to hand the media playing business to Microsoft & Macromedia on a plate.
I've always wondered how the programmers of horrible spyware utilities (Xupiter, Gator, TopText, etc.) feel about their jobs, they've sunk pretty low and reached the sewers of the software industry, it must be grim down there. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Sat 01 Feb |
| The January 2003 server logs reveal that WebWord is still pulling in about 5,000 page views per day. Not too shabby. If you are looking for other WebWord statistics, check our Chris McEvoys WebWord Statistics page. Very useful! |
| Sat 01 Feb 15:29 | Martin Sutherland | Looking down to #25 in the referer listing... You got 101 hits from where?
In the name of research, I visited the site just in case it was an oddly named site devoted to usability, but no. It was pretty much what you'd expect. No obvious hyperlinks to webword.com, either. |
| Sat 01 Feb 15:33 | John S. Rhodes | Martin, I also saw that. Bizarre. I don't have any explanations for it. Does anyone else have any ideas? Maybe it is something similar to what Kottke described with newsreaders? Do sites simply fire off page requests so that they show up in referrer logs, and then we get curious and go visit? (My guess is, Yes.) |
| Sat 01 Feb 15:43 | Mac | Advertisers have realised that a lot of referral log information is used and published in a number of different ways. Most sites will use their referral logs to find out about 'like-minded' sites.
If your referral report pages can be found by google, then the target site is getting a free page-rank boost from you.
I have had a few of these referrers in my logs as well. You may (or may not) have noticed that I have feen filtering these referrers from my webword referrer reports. |
| Sat 01 Feb 16:19 | Mac | I have just posted my Jan 2003 logs for usabilitymustdie.com in case you are interested.
My top search string is 'superhero gallery' which brings up the webword superhero page as the top google result! |
| Sat 01 Feb 16:27 | Mac | And here are some of my favourite search terms that people have used to find pages on usabilitymustdie:
'nngroup nude picture'
'the scapegoats for japanese deflation'
'average people'
'terminating house ants'
'wacky statistics'
'searching for address of owner blue ford pick up truck with lic'
'does the internet make us lonely'
'left-handed statistics' |
| Sun 02 Feb 01:01 | MadMan | 'nngroup nude picture'? That's just sick...
(No... I don't want to imagine it. Nooooooo!) |
|
| WebWord Comment | Thu 30 Jan |
| Ladies Phone? |
| Thu 30 Jan 22:53 | daniel szuc | John, when I click on this link it returns a '404 Error Message ...' |
| Thu 30 Jan 23:16 | Ron Zeno | Article from iMobile.com.au
Samsung's product description |
| Fri 31 Jan 01:29 | daniel szuc | Thanks Ron :) |
| Fri 31 Jan 16:36 | Lydia | Wow, that's a cool phone! It's very attractive and delicate looking (but still seems tough). I like the rounded corners, and I love the flower on the front.
Ugh, I'm such a target for corporate pandering. |
| Fri 31 Jan 17:07 | Morris Cox | Probably something to do with the spaces in the URL. Don't see a .htm or .html either. |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:19 | Adam Greenfield | Reminds me of my feelings about 'L-mode,' here in Japan.
BLEAUUUUUGGGGHHHH. |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:58 | Lydia | I'm almost afraid to ask, but since we don't know your feelings on L-Mode, do let us know. |
| Sat 01 Feb 23:29 | Adam Greenfield | 'BLEAUUUUUGGGGHHHH' doesn't quite capture it for you? |
|
| Vote Now! | Fri 31 Jan |
|
| Fri 31 Jan 20:39 | John S. Rhodes | 1. I used the advice in this old posting to create the survey. Thanks for all the advice!
2. What does this have to do with usability? Nothing. Feel free to criticize this. It won't bother me much.
3. Actually, my second statement is not true. This survey has a lot to with usability. For example, the survey really won't make sense to everyone around the world. Am I talking about U.S. dollars? How would I pay the $1,000? Would I be the only person who had to pay, or would every person in the U.S., or the world? What does 'avoid' mean exactly? Does it mean for now, for 5 years, for 100 years? Would $1,000 be better spent than to simply avoid war? You get the picture. The survey is terrible in many ways. It isn't even a survey. It is just a poll. A stupid, lonely poll, lost in a sea of great usability news. ;-) |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:18 | Adam Greenfield | Interesting question, even if it's just a stalking horse. I answered 'yes,' because when this war kicks off, it's going to cost us all a whole lot more than $1,000 US each, when all the ramifications down through the next twenty or more years are considered.
I'll take that bet, sure. |
| Sat 01 Feb 03:59 | Flaming Drag Queen | I voted 'no' on principle because I believe the war to be unnecessary. Paying $1000 would be like the most overt form of state-sponsored terrorism. 'Give me $1000, or I break your legs!'
I also believe a war will move the economy from the toilet to the septic tank. Right now I'm in the 'haves' group. During and after the war we'll all be 'have nots,' but at least we'll be 'have nots' together. A gloomy viewpoint to be sure, but there is some solace in a shared experience.
I also voted 'no' because I'm not afraid of being drafted. The last time I checked the army wasn't hip to the whole 'drag queen' thing. |
| Sat 01 Feb 11:15 | Mac | I'm with the corporal on this one.Whilst I won't pay a $1000, I am happy to spend $1000 worth of my time, leafletting, petitioning and agitating against this war.
Would you give up one day to avoid this war with Iraq, and possibly prevent one with North Korea?
Does it make any difference if you have family or friends who have been shipped to the gulf in preparation for this war?
What if you are for the war? Do you just keep quiet and dismiss the protesters, or do you try and persuade them that the war is justified? |
| Sat 01 Feb 21:14 | daniel szuc | How to forge a scenario for Saddam's exile
Alternative strategy for Iraq might produce regime change without war's repercussions
THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
New York Times
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/5080495.htm |
|
| Survey Shows Security and Privacy Remain Major Concerns for Online Shoppers | Fri 31 Jan |
| While electronic commerce continues to expand, concern about credit card security and privacy may be preventing many more potential shoppers from making purchases online, according to Year Three of the UCLA Internet Report, released today. However, the survey of 2,000 households also shows that more than 70 percent of Americans who use the Internet now consider online sources to be their most important source of information. (Comments: Thanks Flaming Drag Queen!) |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:10 | Flaming Drag Queen | John won't do it, so I'll say it for him.
Thanks Flaming Drag Queen for the link. |
| Fri 31 Jan 23:56 | Flaming Drag Queen | Sorry, my feathers are a bit ruffled. This site allows unauthenticated (anonymous) posting, but some of its inhabitants are decidedly opposed to anyone who wishes to remain essentially anonymous. |
| Sat 01 Feb 02:56 | daniel szuc | I liken this to ATM usage.
Just as it took people time to get used to accessing cash and managing transations through a 'hole in the wall' a similar phenomenon may occur with 'internet transations'
Or perhaps the adoption will be the same or faster as technology and computers become a more transparent part of people's lives. |
| Sat 01 Feb 04:21 | Flaming Drag Queen | Ahhh, recognition at last. The Gods have blessed me.
Now onto the topic. About those 70% of Americans... do they consider the Internet to be their 'most important source' for information because they consider the Internet to be a more credible source, or because of convenience, or because much of the information they look for is not available from local sources?
Much of the information I look up today I simply would not have bothered searching for in the pre-web days.
1) A street address's +4 zip code extension. Bah! My package will still get there.
2) Lottery numbers. Bah! I'll just read tomorrow's newspaper.
3) The name of that actor who played in that movie. Bah! It's not that important. |
| Sat 01 Feb 10:21 | Smelly Porcupine | Hey Jack, you back here? |
| Sat 01 Feb 13:28 | John S. Rhodes | Smelly Porcupine I might smell Jack too. ;-) Who's Jack? |
| Sat 01 Feb 14:26 | Flaming Drag Queen | You boys are a riot! You don't know how to handle anonymity so you grasp at anything to give it structure and context and keep you familiar and comfortable.
This is the 21st Century. We're here, we're queer, and we design web sites. Get used to it. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Thu 30 Jan |
| Im really, really tired. Im not thinking straight. I have this bizarre idea that I think solves several problems related to micropayments, blogs, compensation, web traffic, and karma. Im going to work on it over the weekend, but right now it seems insanely easy to explain. It also seems fair, fun, and mildly entertaining. Very strange indeed. Did I mention that Im dreadfully tired? |
| Sat 01 Feb 10:46 | daniel szuc | http://www.tired.com/
At least its usable :) |
|
| GoodbyeSpam.com offers anti-spam service | Fri 31 Jan |
| When e-mail arrives in the inbox, the program eliminates blocked e-mail and places all non-approved messages in quarantine. It then automatically sends an e-mail to each sender asking them to click on an embedded link. (Comments: Would you pay $500 to never see another piece of spam? Too much? Fine. How much would you pay? Then again, we could always grow a spam killing community.Thanks Daniel Szuc.) |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:46 | daniel szuc | 150-200 per year if I could see immediate results after an initial trial period. Initial looks at this service indicates that you have to provide your 'mailbox username and password' - I am not sure how many users would be pleased about giving a third party their mailbox account details. |
| Sat 01 Feb 09:58 | Jim | Sounds like ChoiceMail.
Great program that acts as a proxy on your pc. You start with your address book and go from there. Takes a little getting used to, but an overall great product for under $50. Outside of a frustrating first install...works like a champ!
http://www.digiportal.com/ |
| Sat 01 Feb 10:26 | MadMan | Unless you expect genuine business enquiries of course. Nothing better to piss me off as potential customer than having to fuck around with somebody's spam protection. |
|
| Hotel date entry design & usability | Fri 31 Jan |
| This report reviews the designs used today for entering dates into hotel booking websites. It proposes a tested, easy-to-use, date-entry layout style and format that can be implemented on any hotel booking website. This report also suggests 25 date-entry design guidelines. |
| Sat 01 Feb 05:48 | kartachi hasnae | je suis une jeune fille agée de 23 ans diplomé d'hotesse de l'air
je metrise les outils informatique je cherche un poste comme hotesse d'acceuil dans votre hotel
merci |
|
| Sept. 11 Panel Faces Several Pressures | Wed 22 Jan |
| Sen. Jon Corzine, D-N.J., and some of the victims relatives say they doubt the commission can do a thorough job with only the $3 million authorized by Congress. (Comments: Huh? Only $3 million to do this investigation? Shit, it cost at least $4.4 million to investigate Clinton. This just doesnt smell right to me.) |
| Mon 27 Jan 04:05 | Mac | Of course, it was okay to invade Somalia, it was okay to invade Haiti, it was okay to invade Kosovo
No, it wasn't OK. If you look at each of the US 'interventions' over the past decade you will see that they have a lot more to do with shoring up the American Empire than helping the people of those countries.
Don't pretend that those of you who oppose attacking Iraq do so than for any other reason than because it would make our president politically weaker and more likely to lose to a democrat in 2004
Bush isn't my president. I don't have an opportunity to vote in the US presidential elections. If I disagree with his militaristic policies I have to show my displeasure in other ways.
Those of you who say 'stop the war', how then do you propose dealing with Hussein? Just leave him alone? Diplomatically?
The US put Saddam into power. In the 1st Gulf War they refused to support the uprising against him and condemned many rebels to death. The sanctions imposed since the 1st Gulf War haven't hurt Saddam at all but have resulted in the deaths of half a million children, whilch the US think 'a price worth paying'.
Give me a break. You have no courage and you don't deserve to live in freedom if you are unwilling to fight for it.
Does Dan Lane deserve to live in freedom?
DAN LANE
IN JULY of 1965, I joined the Marine Corps. At that particular time, I actually lived in a boys' home. This was the way out for most of us--I would say 80 or 90 percent of the young men went into the service. It didn’t have anything to do with the fact that there was a war going on or being brave or anything. It was just a natural progression of things for us coming out of that situation.
But at the same time, I don’t think I can ignore the fact that growing up, especially in an almost military atmosphere, I remember seeing quite frequently the John Wayne movies about World War II and the Korean War and all the glamour and the heroism. I think that’s important to mention.
That’s why people from George Bush’s staff went to Hollywood right after 9/11, and said, 'This is what the agenda is.' And if everybody checks out the movies or TV, there’s a very strong pro-government, pro-war mood.
At the same time, the experience I went through was that it wasn’t only what I was seeing on Saturday afternoon, but what was also going into the classroom--how history was taught, and what wasn’t talked about, and that whole perspective you get as a young adult.
Just like a lot of other people at 17 years old, you believe the government is doing the right thing, and you see the movies, and you listen to your history teachers, or just about anyone in power. So I went into the war believing that this was where I should be.
Shortly after finishing basic camp, I ended up in Vietnam. I was in the infantry, part of the Rangers. I saw a lot of things. I was wounded a couple times. Some very dear friends of mine who were in my outfit got hit pretty bad. Anyway, I was evacuated, not because I was wounded physically. I just couldn’t deal with it anymore. I couldn’t deal with seeing people die, with seeing children die.
But how fucked up they’ve got your mind! Less than 48 hours after leaving the hospital, I reported to Camp Lejeune and signed a waiver back to Vietnam, because I didn’t feel that I had completed what I needed to complete--that I hadn’t lived up to the expectations of being a Marine and a man.
So I spent another year over there. The first seven months I somehow got through. This was during 1968 and the Tet offensive. I was at the battle of Khe Sanh and a couple other places.
Before it was all over, during my last months, I was having a very difficult time. But instead of keeping it in, it came out. And the way it came out was I ignored the officers. I ended up being court-martialed before all was said and done. Thirty days in the brig, and I was busted from a sergeant down to a private.
I ended up coming back to the United States. The bad thing is that what you see over there and what you feel over there, you can’t talk about. I expressed it in certain ways. And the only help at that time was to go into the VA system--and electrical shock treatment was how they dealt with people with post-traumatic stress.
So I went into isolation--into myself. And the difficult thing about it was that people didn’t want to have anything to do with me. I literally had people that I ran into on the street occasionally who said, 'I heard about what you guys did.' That was the generalization. And there was basically no support system that I was aware of at the time--although I found out later about groups like Vietnam Veterans Against the War.
That was where it stayed, down inside of me. I had a very difficult time holding a job. Part of the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder is that it’s very difficult to stay anywhere very long. I went though probably 22 jobs in a matter four years. Anyway, that is where Vietnam took me.
I don’t want to spend a lot of time on my activities around Staley, but I do want to mention a couple things. I was personally involved at Staley, and to me, it was like another war. It was like I was fighting for my life to survive. It’s tough being locked out for three or three-and-a-half years, trying to exist on $60 a week. And thank goodness there were a lot of people out there who helped financially, but it’s still is a very dramatic thing to go through.
But it wasn’t just Staley. At the time that we were locked out, Caterpillar went out not too long after that, and not too long after that, Bridgestone went out. And this is just in the community of Decatur. I remember coming up to a meeting up here with folks in the ISO and some other organizations, and we were talking about the 'war zone.' And the 'war zone' at that time was not only Decatur. If you went south, the miners were on strike. And if you went north, there were other Caterpillar plants that were on strike.
There were 25,000 people who were on strike--25,000 people who worked for corporations that were doing quite well, but that had decided: 'Hey, we can make more money.' And it didn’t matter what people went through.
In the last three decades, there has been a horrible shift in workers’ jobs--jobs that have been eliminated in this country and taken somewhere overseas or turned over to technology. And for those who remain with jobs, it’s just like at Staley, where the big offer was that they had 800 people there, and there was going to be 300 when all was said and done, and the 500 they’d replace with scabs.
That’s what people deal with every day when they go into negotiations now. It isn’t about negotiations. It is about them trying to dictate to you what you’re going to have. And the unfortunate thing about this is that all too often, we hear about the Staleys, the Caterpillars, the mineworkers and those struggles, but those are just a few. What we don’t hear about is the situations where workers basically accept it and go on.
I guess the message behind that is that this is about all workers. It doesn’t matter if you drive a school bus, it doesn’t matter if you’re out in the fields picking cherries or vegetables, or if you’re working in the service sector. We all suffer. We’re all being dragged down.
And it’s important to say that this didn’t just happen yesterday. It’s all too easy to say that Bush did it. I’m not asking you to vote for Bush. But what I’m saying is that this is the way of life in this country and has been for a long time.
The fact is that there’s a war that is continually waged against workers. And it’s not only against those who are actively at a job. It’s being waged against the elderly, it’s being waged against those who are on fixed incomes, against people who are poor. It’s a war where not everything happens when people come out on strike. It’s also a war where some politician signs off on a piece of legislation, like they did under the Clinton administration, and they tear up the welfare system.
I remember reading about how in New York, they would lay off one group of people and send in another group who had formerly been on welfare to do the work for less. And when it was all said and done, they were making less money than they were on welfare, because they didn’t have insurance anymore, and they weren’t getting help with food.
In this new era of global capitalism, you have the president of the United States say not only that we’re the superpower, but don’t even try to resist in any shape or form. The fact is that what they’re saying to the people of the United States and the world is that they have the right to make a decision about what piece of the pie that everybody’s going to get. And if you disagree with that, we’ll take any measures to stop you.
That’s the era that I think that we’re in right now. It’s nothing new--it’s just much more arrogant and out front. It’s very clear what George’s intentions are. And they’re no different from anybody in the past. But they have gotten to a place where they don’t have to use the cloak and daggers and the smokescreens.
The other thing that just amazes me is that the media has bought into this completely. Not that the media isn’t bought and paid for, but there’s no questioning at any level from the major media. And that’s what people are buying--not everybody, but people are buying it.
I think that the biggest thing I would underline tonight, more than anything else, is the importance of connecting the dots--connecting them for yourselves and connecting them for other people. It’s important to take that message out and go beyond just simply passing a resolution. Resolutions are a first step, but it needs to go further than that. One of the things that we saw at Staley is that when we shut the company down during the in-plant strategy, it wasn’t because somebody sent a paper out, but because we went out and talked to people and organized them.
There’s one impression that I have a hard time getting out of my mind--one of the most horrific things since I returned from Vietnam. It was when I turned on CNN back in 1991, and I watched Baghdad being hit by bomb after bomb after bomb. And as horrible as that looks, I saw that happen in Vietnam. I saw what those kind of bombs can do. I could feel the ground vibrating, I could hear the explosions.
But what was more horrifying is that in a matter of less than 100 hours, 40,000 people were killed immediately as a result of those bombings. Not to minimize what happened at the World Trade Center, but that’s over 10 times as many people killed.
And that doesn’t count the people after that--who died over the next weeks or months. And it doesn’t talk about the devastation that’s been done since 1991 with sanctions and boycotts. That’s what’s horrifying when you put all this in perspective.
And what did George say? When he was giving all his speeches, especially early on, he said you have to be ready to go. This is not something that we’re going to back down on, and it may take generations. In other words, it will be your children as well as you that have to commit to this battle against terrorism. That’s scary. Because that says that there’s been a declaration of war on the world for an indefinite period of time.
Recently, in Britain, two men who were supposed to drive a locomotive with military supplies refused to. And I have to believe that they knew when they did that, there was the potential that they were going to lose their jobs. But what they didn’t want to be involved with was taking that train down there, loading up munitions and driving it somewhere else, because those munitions were going to be used to bomb Baghdad.
We should recognize the courage that it took for those people to do that. And we also have to look at that and say that we need to take those steps. Sometimes, those are not steps that we look forward to. Nobody appreciates spending time in jail because of a sit-in. But the fact is that direct action in the plants and the federal buildings and in the streets--that is what’s going to happen.
I don’t know if it’s going to stop the bombs from being dropped--the airplanes may be on their way right now. And I don’t want that to happen. But I also know that this is just the beginning of this new era.
We have to get that message out, and we have to be prepared to take whatever steps are necessary. We need to get out there, get in front of the capitalists and show them that workers do control this country and they do control the world. |
| Mon 27 Jan 16:03 | MadMan | Er, this is a USABILITY forum, not a political one, folks. Let's stay on-topic. |
| Sat 01 Feb 05:06 | Jason Osgood | Don't pretend that those of you who oppose attacking Iraq do so than for any other reason than because it would make our president politically weaker and more likely to lose to a democrat in 2004.
Um. Okay. In exchange, you acknowledge the reasons Bush II seeks war: profit, revenge, and the 2004 election. |
|
| Briefing for a descent into heck | Mon 27 Jan |
| (v-2.org) if youre writing for the Web, there will sooner or later come a time of reckoning. Very, very few people are capable of cranking out insightful, articulate, even moderately well-researched prose without some return on the investment in time and effort. Sooner or later, many of us are going to have to pass the hat. |
| Mon 27 Jan 06:41 | Mac | v-2
SamuelJohnson.com
evolt.org
ElegantHack.com
WebWord.com
Flazoom.com
PeterMe.com
MadMan |
| Mon 27 Jan 11:35 | Frank Lynch | I have made direct donations as well as gone out of my way to make amazon-affiliate purchases through various sites.
Donations I remember:
www.spinsanity.org
talkingpointsmemo.com
www.themorningnews.org
I also subscribe to Salon and Consumer Reports, and have subscribed to the WSJ; I'm not sure if their status as profit/non-profit is relevant to the issue.
I remember having made amazon purchases through Tomalak's Realm, useit, and Talking Points Memo. (Sometimes this is significant -- I bought >$300 in DVD's through the last site.) |
| Mon 27 Jan 11:36 | Simon Says | The answer is, 'no.' Oh, except for EFF. |
| Mon 27 Jan 11:38 | Simon Says | That's right, you asked about non-profit sites. Blogs are not non-profit. That term has legal meaning in the United States.
If you're really asking about freebie sites, the answer is still 'no.' They publish for free out of their own self interests. We tag along. That's the deal. If you want money for your blog, you're mutating into a different beast. |
| Mon 27 Jan 15:53 | Nick Finck | Personal blogs for a fee? Let's take this senerio here... we have all walked the streets of downtown and at some point or another were handed some flyer by someone who may have even appeard less then presentable... you do one of a few things:
1) say 'no thanks' and walk on.
2) say nothing and walk on by.
3) grab it, glance at it, toss it on the street.
4) grab it, glance at it, toss it in the next garbage can.
5) grab it, glance at it, stuff it in your pocket.
What's the difference between all of these? #1 says it's not worth even your time, #2 says it's not worth your thought, #3 says it's not worth thowing away, #4 says it'snot worth keeping, #5 says it's worth keeping until you get home and empty your pockets... then you throw it away.
When is the last time you have seen an artist properly respected and compensated for their work? I am not talking about the kind of artist that can afford space at a gallery. In a way, words are like art if not one of the same. You can get art anywhere you want, some places don't even charge you... beauty is in the eye of the beholder, it's up to you to determine what is worth it. |
| Mon 27 Jan 17:37 | Wedge Antilles | Most of the people who hand out flyers are paid to do so, or are tied to their promotion through family, friend or religious affiliation.
A better example is a street performer playing a banjo.
1) Walk by and smile or make eye contact
2) Walk by without acknowledging the performer
3) Stop and listen, then walk on
4) Stop and listen, toss some coins in the hat, then walk on
5) Stop and listen, pull out your bongo drums and join in
Do bloggers see themselves as money-driven street performers? Or are they more like Mr. Suburb, who covers his house and front yard with a wild Christmas light display for the mere pleasure of creating the presentation and knowing people will see it? (and with no expectation that people will give him money for his presentation)
What drives bloggers?
1) Money
2) Knowing eyeballs are seeing the blog
3) Public feedback / discussion about the blog
4) Building professional reputation
5) Political or activist purpose
Instead of paying street performers, I give to a local food/housing non-profit organization because it does the most good in the most efficient and effective manner. Likewise, if I ever give money to a blogger, it will be a major web site that provides an outstanding (well above and beyond the call) service to me or my community. So far I have not encountered a worthy blog. |
| Mon 27 Jan 18:55 | Adam Greenfield | Wedge, that's a nasty case of cynicism you seem to have contracted there.
What drives *this* blogger - assuming I meet your definition of same - is the wish to make connections between folks who might not otherwise be aware of each others' work, and occasionally to make some small contribution to the evolving user-experience discipline.
That's it.
The positive feedback, the raised personal profile, all of that stuff: it's truly wonderful, and I admit to enjoying it greatly, but it's not why I do it. I doubt it's why Christina Wodtke does it, or Fabio Sergio, or Dan Hill, or any of the people whose work has been so influential on me.
And money? I'll tell you what, Wedge, me boyo: when servers are free, and UPS's come in cereal boxes, and bandwidth is given away, and oh yes, when my time no longer has an opportunity cost, well then, I'll take that whorish, unworthy 'Support' page down. |
| Mon 27 Jan 19:44 | Wedge Antilles | Would you blog alone in a forest with no one around -- ever -- to read your blog? If not, then you're #2, influenced by the fact eyeballs see your blog.
As for money, the trade-off in asking for money in exchange for your blog is that you alter the entire dynamic of the experience. Which one are you?
A) Playing a flute in the park
B) Playing a flute in the park with a hat out for accepting money
C) Playing a flute in a concert hall
If you're A) playing flute in the park (presumably for your own enjoyment and/or those around you), well... you paid money for that flute, and spent a lot of your time to learn and practice the flute, maybe even paid for flute lessons, and your time spent in the park certainly has a cost.
Blogger A) eats the personal cost out of personal interest. You are not A). You are like the street performer. Don't try to sounding lofty. If you ask for money, you are asking for something in return for your time and expense. Your hand is upturned as I pass you on the street. Your hat is on the ground asking me to toss coins inside.
If you truly are lofty, then espouse a philosophy such as careware. |
| Mon 27 Jan 21:20 | Frank Lynch | FWIW, the approach at This Modern World to those who want to give to the site was to link to a genuine charity (a pet shelter in Park Slope). |
| Mon 27 Jan 22:48 | Adam Greenfield | 'CareWare'? Very nice. *Please.*
I'm not lofty. I am most definitely not a saint. I *am* implicated in precisely the same late-capitalist structure as everyone else here, which is to say:
- I have tax obligations.
- I have other nonoptional expenses.
- I have discretionary expenses. There are things I want.
Now, I happen to be a reasonably good writer. Some people enjoy the things I write. I can guarantee you that any one of my better essays is a greater contribution to the field in which I work than my site maps or user personae or competitive-site audits, which are competent and well-considered, but nothing earth-shaking. Why then can I expect to be paid $300 an hour for producing the latter, without question, but even implying that the former has some kind of value makes me a panhandler?
Should I forego those things that are 'merely' desires? Should I pretend that I don't believe what I manifestly do, which is that showing meaningful appreciation for favors received is civilized behavior for adults? If I stay over your house, I take you out to dinner or buy you something off your wishlist by way of saying thanks. If I get some real and valuable insight from something you've written, I will attempt to do much the same. There's no difference to me; making concrete displays of gratitude is important to me, and there's something wrong in your calculus if you suggest that such exchanges should have no place in the formation of a community. Indeed, reciprocal indebtedness is part of how people have always come to constitute a community in the first place.
And what's still more offensive to me is that you're making this assertion while hiding behind a cheesy screen name. There's nothing on the line for you, is there? |
| Tue 28 Jan 00:00 | Wedge Antilles | Adam, if you think so lowly of street performers that says something about you, not me. By the way, a street performer is not a 'panhandler.'
I'll disregard the many other implications you've made about my writings as they are not related to my words. I didn't say your support page was 'whorish, unworthy,' or that you are a panhandler, or any of your other silly implications.
You are a master of persuasion, in the Platonic sense. The truth in my words remains despite your personal feelings or displeasure in not knowing my identity. |
| Tue 28 Jan 04:35 | Adam Greenfield | Unworthy: 'So far I have not encountered a worthy blog. '
Your words, o lofty one.
There's no truth in your words, merely valuations. And I find those valuations juvenile. |
| Tue 28 Jan 07:19 | John S. Rhodes | This thread, while amusing, is getting a bit personal. Keep the flames down please. Much appreciated. |
| Tue 28 Jan 11:27 | Wedge Antilles | Interesting. I made a comment about the blogosphere in general and you took it personally. Interesting. |
| Tue 28 Jan 13:26 | John S. Rhodes | Wedge,
'getting a bit personal' does not mean I am personally upset or offended. In fact, I like to see the banter and appreciate the conversations. Also, what is 'interesting' exactly? I'd like to have some clarification because now I am curious. |
| Tue 28 Jan 14:36 | Wedge Antilles | My last message was in reference to Adam's citing my sentence -- 'So far I have not encountered a worthy blog.' -- as evidence for my inferring his support page is 'whorish' and 'unworthy.'
I found it 'interesting' that (because I have not yet encountered a blog I want to give money to) a person would infer I was calling a specific web site 'whorish' and 'unworthy.' Those are strong words that are not supported by my commentary.
I thought we were discussing issues in the academic sense, dealing with ideas and theories about the web. For example, to claim that a reason people produce web sites is for eyeballs or money is merely my observation -- neither good nor bad. I didn't say feedback/exposure (eyeballs) or money were evil. If people take differing opinions personally then perhaps this is not the place for me. |
| Tue 28 Jan 20:53 | Adam Greenfield | Oh fer cryin' out loud. You can dish it out, but you sure can't take it, can you?
You show up anonymously, post a bunch of snide and judgmental comments, disingenuously claim to not understand why they might irritate, and then complain that you've been taken out of context?
I don't think so.
Nothing is 'academic.' We're talking about blogs - about ways of sharing information that are by their very nature extremely personal. Every insight you or I can offer on this subject hits someone close to home, and to pretend otherwise is where your sophistry lies. |
| Tue 28 Jan 22:36 | Wedge Antilles | For a web site that comes so highly recommended, I'm surprised to find this level of discourse. I'll stick to chi-web where insults are not commonplace. |
| Wed 29 Jan 09:17 | John S. Rhodes | 'For a web site that comes so highly recommended...'
1. Who recommends WebWord?
2. My guess is that it is recommended because of the news that is posted, not necessarily the comments that are posted by readers. Then again, I enjoy posting news to WebWord and I really enjoy reader comments. I'm addicted to my readers. (I never really thought of it this way, but it is true.)
3. This is a pretty open forum and people are encouraged to say what they want to say (for the most part). Perhaps the comments should be treated like porn...if you don't like it, don't read it. :-) That's pretty catchy actually -- 'WebWord: The Porn of Usability'
4. 'I'm addicted to my readers.' + 'WebWord: The Porn of Usability' = I'm addicted to porn?
5. Watch, since I mentioned 'porn' a few times in this posting, I'll get a bunch of Google traffic in a couple of days or weeks. That'll be a hoot. |
| Wed 29 Jan 20:58 | Che Tamahori | I'm still trying to figure out how this thread escalated into 'personal attacks'; sorry Adam, but I think you got Wedge wrongo. Were we reading the same post?
Wedge's original post was completely non-acusatory, and pointed out that he (from a purely personal point of view) had not encountered a blog that made him want to pay the writer for their contribution to the blogoshere. Fair enough.
He posited that there were a number of reasons that people write blogs.
I took this to mean that these were a range of reasons that someone might blog. I don't think Wedge suggested that all of these reasons applied to every blog. From Adam's own responses, he sounds like a self-admitted '#2' and '#3' -- in a good way!
There are still some good observations in this thread. Lets get back on track.
Che |
| Wed 29 Jan 21:23 | Adam Greenfield | Che, it's possible. Indeed, it's possible that I take most things too personally.
I will admit to having a hard time taking seriously the insights of someone who posts under the name of a minor Star Wars character, however. Again, my issue.
Back on topic, 'Wedge' has his criteria for contributing to an independent content site, and they appear to be pretty stringent: significantly 'above and beyond.' But I have to ask, 'above and beyond' what, precisely?
What's the standard we're looking at?
You shell out, what, $3 or $4 for a copy of just about any newsstand magazine, and how well are they written? How much of the content are you able to take with you into your daily life? Remember that people are asked to pay the same for the Economist and the New Yorker that they are for People.
Folks pay $8.95 for eminently disposable airport novels, generally destined to provide reading material for the duration of a single flight. These frequently feature stock situations, paperthin characters, awful dialogue, hamfisted exposition...but that's what they go for.
A new hardcover book is going to run you $25 or $30 these days, despite the fact that the content is identical with the paperback edition - possibly a little fresher, since there's generally some lag in releasing the paperback. But you know what? Tens of thousands of people bought Michael Crichton's Blur despite the fact that they had already read it, when it had the title 'Jurassic Park' (and 'Rising Sun,' and 'Terminal Man,' etc. etc.)
So just how far above and beyond this standard does a solo operator on the Web have to forge before they are found deserving of even a dollar or two? Mind you, we're even talking about a voluntary contribution, not a cost-of-entry.
And online content is so much more useful than printed matter! It can be instantly emailed to an arbitrary number of contacts, indexed, cut-and-paste, searched, and even rendered into ink on paper should that form prove more convenient to the user.
No, we're looking at a double standard here, plain and simple, and one I find a little spoiled. Maybe it's because we've sloppily used the term 'blog,' and therefore implied that the content in question is something on the order of 'what I ate and drank after my date on Thursday night,' etc. But we're talking about WebWord, too, and all the other independent, content-offering Web entities. |
| Wed 29 Jan 22:33 | Che Tamahori | Good points Adam. We place very different economic values on intellectual property in different media. Why?
I will often buy a newspaper, despite the entire issues' content being available online for free. What am I paying for?
In one sense, I am paying the $1 it costs to cut down trees, make newsprint, print words on it and transport the words to the newsagent. We are not paying for the writing (well, not more than $.001 per paper, knowing what journalists get paid.)
But in other media, there is very little relationship between the production cost, and the price charged (Movies? CDs?)
'Information wants to be free' is of socio-political significance, but economic nonsense. Writing requires time and effort; it has an opportunity cost, and hence, has an economic cost. If you don't charge for your writing (and it has value to others), you are simply giving your labour away.
So why should intellectual labour be given away for free when in one medium, when no-one expects it to be free in another? |
| Thu 30 Jan 23:34 | Flaming Drag Queen | Che, the relationship between the price of a newspaper and its production is not direct. Yes, often the costs are similar, and publishers sometimes even draw the correlation, but when advertising revenue is down, the purchase price goes up. Your money gets stirred into the same pot with advertising revenue to pay for printing + salaries + distribution + miscellaneous costs.
As for your question... People expect online content to be free simply because that's how it has been offered from the start and the situation has persisted for years. Plus, given the ease of individual publishing (blogs, etc.), there is a content glut.
I welcome online subscriptions insofar as they will help separate the wheat from the chaff. This weeding already exists in the print world. I buy People magazine because it dishes the dirt really good. How many magazines are there like People? Very few. For a good reason.
How many celebrity news and fan web sites are there? Thousands. How many would there be if they depended on subscriptions? Very few. For a good reason. A publisher with poor content will have few subscriptions and therefore few people referring the publisher to friends and colleagues. Poor subscription sites will be pushed into Google's bottomless pit.
Living with free web sites means living with content glut. Some of us are willing to pay to rise above the fray by reading a handful of high quality web sites.
Jonathan links to a bunch of blogs and other sites, as do most bloggers. Suppose half of those sites charged a subscription. Not freebie enticers for a paid report like Jakob, but real subscriptions. No pay, no play. Would Jonathan still link to all those sites? No, just the ones he considers worth the money. |
| Fri 31 Jan 11:14 | John S. Rhodes | Flaming Drag Queen, just for clarification my name is John, not Jonathan. (Good posting, by the way.) |
| Fri 31 Jan 12:47 | Flaming Drag Queen | Sorry Johnny, I meant no imposition. |
| Fri 31 Jan 15:28 | boysen | After a quick, unbiased read, I think Adam took Wedge's comments personally, when he did not intend them to be.
The moral? Communication is so much more than the words we use. |
| Fri 31 Jan 19:51 | Adam Greenfield | boysen, while that may be so, I will also say that I have a hard time taking folks seriously when they post under assumed identities or stoopit screen names.
While I prefer to believe that we all evaluate ideas on their merits rather than their origin, that's not always the case. So when I see someone take advantage of the self-authentication ability that's been provided them here to comment from anonymity, or a moniker like Flaming Drag Queen, I have to question their sincerity.
This may be an old-fashioned habit, but if you really believe in what you say, I expect you to stand by it with the full force of a verifiable identity. Otherwise, it's just noise in the channel to me. |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:15 | Flaming Drag Queen | Adam, I'm sorry you're not man enough to look past my mascara and take my comments on the economics of web publishing seriously. Your loss. |
|
| Secrecy Surrounds a Bush Brother's Role in 9/11 Security | Sun 26 Jan |
| But the suggestion is inescapable that any investigation into security arrangements preceding 9/11, at some of the nations most sensitive facilities, has been impeded to this day by narrowly political concerns in the White House. (Comments: Only $3 million.) |
| Mon 27 Jan 19:18 | Anonymous | What's this got to do with usability? |
| Tue 28 Jan 06:28 | Mac | Gulf War 2 - aka World War 2.5
What about the usability of this flash movie?
Whilst, the structure is linear, I think it makes good use of flash. |
| Fri 31 Jan 21:10 | Tom | I think you should send this to Oliver Stone. More than enough material for at least 3 of his paranoia-laced scripts. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Thu 30 Jan |
| What should people be paid for? Their time? Creativity? Productivity? The comments in this recent WebWord posting really got me thinking about this topic. |
| Thu 30 Jan 23:03 | Ron Zeno | Results. Value. |
| Thu 30 Jan 23:55 | Jason Fried | People should be paid for the value they provide you. |
| Fri 31 Jan 00:09 | Adam Greenfield | People should feel authorized to recognize and reward, as it suits them, work that has figured in their emotional or intellectual lives. |
| Fri 31 Jan 00:49 | daniel szuc | Value and deliverables. In a creative process its sometimes easy to get lost in the creativity and forgetting the deliverable. |
| Fri 31 Jan 01:04 | Anonymous | No climax, no dinero. |
| Fri 31 Jan 01:40 | Eric Scheid | People should get paid what they ask for, if you agree to that deal. If they ask to be paid on results, and you accept, that's the deal. If they ask to be paid on their time, not results, and you accept, that's the deal.
If you don't accept, you don't have to pay. |
| Fri 31 Jan 11:34 | Tom | People should be paid for whatever they can sell. |
| Fri 31 Jan 14:54 | Bernard | It's a trade. Some people are willing to give away valuable items for 'free' (e.g. friends who always organize dinners and events). Also, it costs more for some people to want to do a thing. We're trading the money for the action. |
| Fri 31 Jan 15:20 | Charlie Xavier | Good sex. |
| Fri 31 Jan 19:21 | daniel szuc | Knowledge and experience. |
|
| What Price Content? | Tue 28 Jan |
| (ClickZ) Surveys of American consumers routinely conclude newspaper sites dont cannibalize print subscriptions. They actually increase single-copy sales. |
| Tue 28 Jan 22:01 | John S. Rhodes | Thanks for the link, Frank. |
| Wed 29 Jan 04:25 | Alan Fisher | The article refers to an earlier article by the same author about the economics of CD pricing / file sharing etc. There's been a lot of publicity recently about the record companies dire warnings on the evils of file sharing, but how many people realise that the sales of CDs in the UK went UP last year by 3%? And this in a year when the quality of the music on offer was generally seen as being, shall we say, disappointing. Here's an interesting article on the subject - Why the net won't dampen record sales. Along with the article referenced here, these are the first attempts I've seen to apply standard economic theory to the issue of payment for on-line content. |
| Wed 29 Jan 20:42 | daniel szuc | As much as having access to and keeping 'electronic' versions of things is nice and easy (at times), there is something to be said for touching tangible things and buying things you can put onto your shelf e.g. books, CDs etc |
| Thu 30 Jan 14:49 | Anonymous | I do not resemble the author's claim.
BEFORE: I bought our only town's newspaper every Sunday for classifieds and coupons.
NOW: I read the newspaper's web site religiously every day for news. I read the web site classifieds every Sunday.
The $1.50 I used to pay for the Sunday edition I never recouped with the coupons I used, so now I do without coupons. And really, I dislike the editorial slant our newspaper puts in news stories. I won't shed a tear if the newspaper goes under. Maybe it will be replaced by something better.
I might be enticed to subscribe to a print newspaper if it had a couple full daily pages of good comics. Reading individual comic strips on web sites is so tedious. But my newspaper embraces decrepit dinosaurs like Peanuts, Marmaduke, Heathcliff, Family Circus and a bunch of others that ceased being funny 20 years ago. Those suckers are coasting on reputation alone.
I would pay for a *good* news web site. I like that idea because with a CMS it would mean low overhead. A 1 or 2 person news operation would be possible for a given geographic area. I could subscribe to a 'neighborhood' news site, and probably have my choice of a few news sites whose coverage area overlaps my interests. Assuming competition was reintroduced to the news market, journalists, editors and publishers would have to try harder to be objective or lose subscribers. |
| Fri 31 Jan 15:46 | boysen | Wonderful, common-sense stuff based on real-world economics. This guy reminds me of me. I guess that's an egotistical thing to say since I just praised his work. Maybe I should have said, 'I completely agree with what Mr. Crosbie wrote.'
Either way. |
|
| Wal-Mart's influence grows | Thu 30 Jan |
| I joke were all going to be working for Wal-Mart someday. |
| Fri 31 Jan 15:27 | Wolf | Reminds me of the Sliders Episode where they're trapped in a Mall...
http://www.earthprime.com/archive/capsule.asp?season=3&episode=12
(synopsis)
Mall World :
Just when you think the Christmas consumer frenzy was bad,
you end up here. Huge open malls that contain schools, lodging and everything a person could need to subsist are big business and a social ill. This gives 'just another day at the mall' a whole new meaning.. |
|
| HTML's Time is Over. Let's Move On. | Thu 30 Jan |
| (Boxes and Arrows) We have used incredible ingenuity to make up for the faults of HTML by putting all of the real processing effort on the server side, but the time has come to create a new system that is low bandwidth, utilizes a single code base for all platforms, and is componentized enough to make updating and customizations easy using internet-based distribution. |
| Fri 31 Jan 04:59 | Matt Round | It's true that creating efficient application software via HTML is often hard, but it can be done fairly well (see Oddpost), and simple interfaces will work cross-platform/browser, even as far as things like mobile phones, which offers some huge advantages over conventional desktop software.
Flash works well for some things, although creating a consistent interface without manually fiddling with the position of every last item can be difficult, as it's aimed at those working visually rather than structurally.
The CMS systems I sometimes work on in my day job would be able to do far more if they were produced as conventional desktop applications rather than via a web interface, but they'd also cost more to produce and involve vastly more technical support. Let's face it, desktop applications are still horrible to produce - go and read Joel On Software for a while if you don't believe me. |
| Fri 31 Jan 12:15 | Hyse | Oddpost requires Internet Explorer 5.0 (or above) for Windows. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Tue 28 Jan |
| Micropayments wouldnt be used to support blogs, they would be used to support people. Oh wait, micropayments are a bad idea. Right? |
| Wed 29 Jan 01:22 | Progenitor | The problem with micropayments is the name.
micro = computers, or scientific gobbledygook.
payment = taking my hard earned cash away from me.
Devise a name that everyone can get behind.
Web Wampum
Blog Boodle
Cyberflies
Chicklets (who doesn't like Chicklets?) |
| Wed 29 Jan 04:20 | Adam Greenfield | Oh. You mean...like 'Flooz'? |
| Wed 29 Jan 05:45 | Progenitor | No, Flooz is a dumb name. And it wasn't even used for micropayments. Plus, it should have had an 'e' on the end. |
| Wed 29 Jan 07:57 | Lyle | How about some variation of 'credit'. Everyone likes to be given credit. |
| Wed 29 Jan 12:02 | Mac | Is it a 'little payment' or 'payment for a little thing' ?
'Cashpresso'
'Sweets'
'kermits' |
| Wed 29 Jan 12:29 | Mikado | Web Subsidy
Peeper's Penance
Freeloader Tariff
Jellybaby |
| Wed 29 Jan 13:29 | Dennis G. Jerz | Micro = computers? Not in my dictionary, Progenitor. It means very small. Bloggers already talk about 'link love' as the currency of the blogosphere. Personally, I'd vote for 'quatloos'. |
| Wed 29 Jan 13:29 | Jim | I think we can forget about micropayments - unless you can find a group of people that like getting nickle-and-dimed to death.
Instead, why not consider the model that Public Radio uses? They let you sponsor shows and offer public recognition to major supporters.
Do you think this could work with some web sites? |
| Wed 29 Jan 15:32 | MicroDude | There's this word some people know called 'microcomputer.' Some of those people say 'micros' when they mean 'computers.' |
| Wed 29 Jan 19:18 | Lydia | 10 quatloos to the newcomer! Only, Dennis isn't a newcomer, but you get the idea. |
| Wed 29 Jan 21:32 | Lyle | 'So what are Quatloos? That's easy -- Six Koos make a Quatloo, and Eight
Quatloos make a Mooloo. So what are Koos and Mooloos? Well, every Koos
is worth Four Plocks, and if you get Sixteen Mooloos together you can
trade them for a Znoos.' |
| Thu 30 Jan 01:01 | Dennis G. Jerz | How about another obscure Star Trek reference. On my website I mentioned William Shatner's weblog with the headline 'No more blog blog blog!' Anybody know where that one's from? |
| Thu 30 Jan 07:22 | Frank Lynch | Chitlins. crumbs. |
| Thu 30 Jan 09:23 | MarkN | 'millicent' was (and is) a pretty good name, IMHO
IIRC, one of the problems with micropayments was that the effort
involved in deciding whether to pay is greater than the
sum of money involved. 'micro' implies something too small,
so how's about:
mini-money
smaller change
e-monnaie |
| Thu 30 Jan 19:21 | Tomasz Szynalski | I don't understand the 'nickled-and-dimed to death' argument. Every time you turn on your computer or use your toaster, your electric bill goes up by fractions of a cent. You pay a small amount of money whenever you make a phone call.
If you say micropayments won't work, isn't it like saying the billing system for electricity and telephone service won't work? |
|
| Designing for everyone | Mon 27 Jan |
| ? Berna Tural: I am currently working on a project where the higher management is extremely decided not to define the target audience, or to define the target audience as everybody. They say the design should be SO simple that if you were to pull Joe Smith from the street hed be able to use it. Ok, Im definitely a fan of simplicity, but is this extreme or not? (MadMan comments: Whats your advice for Berna?) |
| Mon 27 Jan 19:12 | Ron Zeno | Nonsense. Management is simply not sharing what they know of the target audience. (Perhaps some of them are hiding their incompetence as well.)
I'm sure they have very specific requirements for language, culture, age, income, technology access, technology competence, etc. Otherwise, the only product you can make and market has to be something not much more complex than a pen and a pad of paper. ;) |
| Mon 27 Jan 21:31 | Lydia | Whenever I have heard of directives like that (thank goodness I have never one of these personally) it has always been a case of management thinking they are too smart for developers. 'We'll tell them we want something simple and leave out all the messy details because they'll just complicate things if they knew what was really involved.' Translation = we don't trust you.
The result is usually disaster, especially if the developer really tries to make it work. They fall far short of what management actually wants (because management wouldn't tell them what they want), and get in trouble for it (because management forgets that they didn't tell the developer what they want).
As for advice, I would try reason first, and humor second. Try to explain that you can't create a usable interface under those guidelines, and why. If that doesn't work, prototype something so ludicrous (yet simple, that's the key) that they are forced to give you guidelines.
Or, you could overcomplicate it. Build in a voice interface for disabled users, put one field per screen so it works in early versions of Netscape without a mouse, whatever.
I wish I could say option #3 is to get a new job, but that isn't feasible in this market. |
| Mon 27 Jan 23:11 | Frank Lynch | Somebody at my old job (I'm the wino on the street: 'I used to be somebody!!') has my copy of Cooper's 'The INmates Are Running the Asylum,' and I think (on memory!) something like chapter 2 starts with this kiss of death (words to this effect): 'Squandering a gazillion dollars is not easy to do, but a poorly managed software design project is eminently suited for the task.'
Cooper's book is incredibly valuable not just for its practical advice, but because it offers scary sound-bite-like riot acts which can stop a meeting dead in its tracks. Its worth picking up for thatb alone. But it also takes you through the value of imaghining user scenarios (even if he doesn';t recomment verifyinh the validity of the scenarios). Useful lines even in these areas...
Somewhere Nielsen also talks bout the needs for interfaces that alolow shortcuts for expert users and the yellow brick road for the beginners... That if your interface needs to address them all, you have to allow some kind of different navigation tools.
(again, sorry for the typos due to the carrot slicing incident. and the kid unit didn't even -like- the seitan in the shepherds pie.) |
| Mon 27 Jan 23:21 | Anonymous | Cop??t! |
| Tue 28 Jan 01:17 | MadMan | Here's what I wrote to Berna, incidentally.
They say the design should be SO simple that if you were to pull Joe Smith from the street he'd be able to use it.
Impossible. NOTHING in life is 'intuitive'. It all carries various learning curves. Telling the time isn't easy. Remember how much we struggled with it as children. When children are born, they don't associate smiles with happiness. It's a learned response.
When you make a computer interface, you assume that the person knows how to turn on his PC, how to surf to your Web site, how to use a mouse, how to type, how to click links, how a web page works, etc. There is no guarantee that Joe User off the street has ever used a computer. In that case, your hands are tied. If he doesn't know how to surf to a web page, for instance, YOU can't do anything about it.
All design has to make compromises. All design has to make certain assumptions. In doing so, you WILL lose a percentage of 'everybody', but you CAN'T be everything to everybody. It is better to make a product that works extremely well for a smaller group of people than to make a product that is mediocre for everyone.
Actually, you *sacrifice* simplicity when you target everyone. The more the types of target users, the more potential paths they can take. This means more scenarios to cater for. The less reliable your usability testing becomes (Why? Because as you expand your user base, you increase the chances of some important usability flaw NOT being discovered in your testing.) The simplest product to design is that which will be used by only ONE person. As you keep adding people, you increase the complexity of the process. Is that moving towards simplicity? I think not. Try those arguments with your boss. |
| Tue 28 Jan 04:10 | Mac | If Managament don't want to descibe an audience, then take responsibility and define it yourself. Would you rely on management to do your design for you?
(line em up against the wall and shoot the lot of them hee heee heee... hang on I didn't say that did I? I was only supposed to think it. damn, now they'll all know that I'm not a reasonable unbiased person ) |
| Tue 28 Jan 08:10 | daniel szuc | 'SO simple that if you were to pull Joe Smith from the street he'd be able to use it.'
Step 1. Define the target audiences IF YOU CANT
Step 2. Take them up on the offer and usability test it with anyone (without a definfed target :) IF YOU CANT
Step 3. Test it on members of management who are not close to the system being built (i.e. those who have only seen demos) and usability test it on them.
After all, they are in the 'Joe Smith' target group. Right? :) |
| Tue 28 Jan 09:52 | dix | i've had something like this, where a client wanted a logo that appealled to everyone ('from babies to 80-year-olds'). occassionally i'll get one of those ultra-vague descriptions where the client has some overblown idea of wanting 'universal appeal.'
i tell them that if i could promise that, i'd be retired on the profits from my book. then i try to extract as much info from them as i can... |
| Wed 29 Jan 08:57 | Toby | All of these comments are kind of right.
The best way to deal with an undefined Target Audience is to make assumptions about them - BUT make sure that you keep a list of the assumptions. Each time you show the design you also remind them of the assumptions on which that design is based. If they change one of the assumptions that brings you closer to defining the target audience.
By the end of the design process you will have a usable design, and a target audience description (assumption list). If the management then don't like it they have had visibility of the assumptions all the way down the line so could have changed/challenged an assumption at any time. |
| Wed 29 Jan 11:37 | Berna | Thanks so much for all the comments. Definitely helps alot. I was able to get out of the lock-up meeting today, so I can post. I've updated my site Naturex. You can read the detailed updates on the issue from there.
But they seem like they're not going to change their minds on the 'design it so simple that anybody and everybody can use it' motto. But I am beginning to understand that what they mean by 'everybody' is really not Joe Smith off the street. It's more or less themselves... won't comment on the 'off the street' part. :pp
I've tried rationale first, didnt go too well, tried humor, they seemed to get the point but still no signs of flexibility. Still no sound user demographics. But I did get some ideas, so I'm even ok with that. Better than nothing.
The good news is I've been dubbed 'The Queen of Simplicity' because I keep reminding everybody during practically every idea thrown on the table to keep it Simple. It's really not suprising because we have a room full of engineers and developers and me! I wish I wasnt bound by so strict confidentiality rules and able to tell you about some things they come up with and expect 'everybody' to know what it is heheh. It's informative and amusing to say the least...
Afterall these meetings, we still have 2 more weeks to go, in lockup, to finalize the Requirements. I just hope I dont get a different kind of nickname in the meantime. |
| Thu 30 Jan 01:53 | Lyle Kantrovich | I've had a bit of experience with clients like this. What I've found is that when clients say they are targeting 'everyone' it's a sign that they don't know who they are/should be targeting. Even if you point out why they can't target everyone, it often doesn't help -- because they can't figure out how to define their target. Even if they understand your need, they don't know the answer and can't figure out how to get it.
Your best bet is to help them define their audience - lead them through the process or find someone else who can. You might start with questions like:
- what industries do we serve?
- what size companies are we targeting?
- what specific companies are we targeting?
- what roles do decision makers at customer companies hold (e.g. CIO, R&D, Marketing, QA, etc.)
- what things to these people care about?
- what questions do they ask our sales people?
This is just a start, but these kinds of questions will help you zero in a bit. Of course, all the answers you get from internal people might be inaccurate mis-characterizations...so proceed cautiously and look for ways to validate the answers you get.
Hope that helps. |
| Thu 30 Jan 10:21 | Berna | Thanks for the comments Lyle. I will try those questions. There is no one single industry that we are targeting. Our customers are made up from retail to government to educational institutions and more. The decisions they hold on the other hand, is a huge list. For instance one of the issue we face is that the user who places the order might be an assistant to the actual decision maker and might not know which billing account to use. etc...
The scope of the project has already changed and it is now determined that the users are going to be internal users for the first release. But my dilemma about having a variety of expertise continues. No two internal people specialize in the same area. From everybody, it is now down to being targeted to about 100 people with all very different areas of expertise, vocabulary, technical knowledge and even age and years of experience with the company. I am trying to keep the assumptions to a minimum at this point. I dont know if that's a good or bad thing. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Sun 26 Jan |
| Tomo Maenos usability article is in Japanese. That means that I cant read it. Maybe you can. Enjoy! |
| Mon 27 Jan 11:43 | Simon | People in other countries read and speak other languages. Well, I guess I have to ignore your web page because it's not written in English. Ha ha!
What an incredibly inane observation to make. I'm not sure you could be more arrogant. |
| Mon 27 Jan 16:04 | MadMan | I think what Adam was trying to say was that the Japanese don't pay too much attention to usability, not that articles written in other languages are worthless.
Or am I wrong? |
| Mon 27 Jan 18:36 | Kent | Simon:
You may want to look at some of Adam Greenfield’s other comments on
usability in Japan. For instance: My boss is a 48-year-old housewife from Niigata Prefecture |
| Mon 27 Jan 20:12 | George Olsen | Or -- knowing that Adam speaks Japanese and has practiced IA in Japan -- he may have meant he read the article and didn't think much of it, for reasons not mentioned.
There are lots of bad articles about usability in lots of langauges.
However, I'd say MadMan's guess is probably accurate based on Adam's articles and other comments made elsewhere. |
| Wed 29 Jan 08:44 | Adam Greenfield | Thanks, MadMan, Kent, George. You are all correct.
In case that needs further clarification, Simon: obviously, it is not whether or not a given article is written in Japanese that renders it pointless, it is how an audience responds to and uses it.
In the case of the Japanese Web development community, it is my considered opinion that there is still critical confusion as to what 'usability' means and implies. I think the evidence of just about any corporate Japanese Web site you can point at will substantiate this viewpoint.
It goes (way) beyond the Web, too. I read in last month's AXIS Magazine, which is the foremost serious Japanese journal of design, that a new, TiVo-like device being brought to market by Sony is considered 'user friendly' because it 'completely eliminates operation buttons' and sports a blue light which 'gradually emits and then fades, as though the machine itself is pulsing, indicating that the user's favorite program is being recorded.'
This 'establishes a new relationship between machines and people'??
I mean, aside from the fact that every iMac, iBook, PowerMac and PowerBook sold in the last four years has done just this, and aside from the fact that, yes, it does indicate some otherwise potentially obscure internal state of the machine to the user, in what way does this conduce to the device's usability?
The sad, plain fact is that most Japanese Web sites - and as we've seen, no small percentage of Japanese hardware - are wretchedly unusable, overburdened with 'friendly' (i.e. pointless) features, provided with opaque navigational frameworks, and sorted into categorization schemas that defy ready comprehension even by other native Japanese. Labeling remains a poorly understood art, and even basic issues like when to require users to log in to gain access to content are routinely handled in ways that would be considered hamfistedly amateurish in Western practice.
Now, this is harsh, and it sounds at first blush unbelievably arrogant and hyperbolic, and in consequence I am not a particularly beloved presence in Japanese Web development circles. Unfortunately, it's also true, and the evidence is there for anyone to be seen - which accounts for why so many of the same people who complain about my lack of diplomacy also hire me to suggest improvements to their sites. I'm sure there are many folks here who would be happy for me to bugger off so they could return to the happier task of giving each other Web design awards and garlands for 'user friendliness.'
But it's not going to happen on my watch. I stand by the notion that Japanese users, just as much as any human beings anywhere else in the world, have the inalienable right to devices and experiences that have been designed to account for their needs, limitations and preferences. |
| Wed 29 Jan 19:29 | Lydia | I like my powerbook 'nite lite' because I'm a lazy user. I close the lid and forget to turn the damn thing off. I like to shut down before I throw it in a bag and hit the pavement, and I can tell immediately if it is on or not by seeing the tiny green light pulsing in the back of it. Again, I am too lazy to open it and attempt to wake it up - I want to know if it is on or not without doing that. Only if it's on will I open it and shut down.
So, in other words, it's very usable.
Perhaps it is the very nature of traditional usability (the JN kind of usability) that is so repellant to the Japanese, who are very visual and want things to also be friendly and polite. Perhaps traditional usability is simply too rough.
The challenge, then, is to make usability work for the Japanese mindset, to strike a compromise between what is best, and what will make it better. I think it would be an interesting challenge, and it sometimes makes me wish I could speak intelligible Japanese. |
| Wed 29 Jan 21:37 | Adam Greenfield | Lydia, don't misread me: I love the Apple breath light, and I agree, in the Apple context it performs a highly useful function, in situations just like the ones you mention and others.
I think we can agree that there's the same sort of issue with a Tivo-type unit, that it looks inert while it's doing its job, and it is indeed very thoughtful to provide the user with a cue that it is in fact operating.
But that's just one aspect of its operation. By my lights (sorry), you'd have to consider the entire interface of a device before lauding it in toto as 'user-friendly,' not just one dashboard doohickey.
With regard to the challenge you mention, you are more than welcome to come on over here and give it your best shot. I will promise you that there is plenty of overt interest in 'usability,' as it's been a buzzword among corporate audiences for just about the entire time I've been here.
However, as you surmise, there is very little interest in (or budgetary tolerance for) the hard work of actually doing usability and user testing. In my experience here, it has generally been sufficient for executives to assure the lapdog business and design press that 'usability' and 'user friendliness' are important to them for these comments to be taken at face value, even when the product in question is known to be a mess (i.e., in subsequent testing, no fewer than 80% of users report being unable to figure out the meaning of labels or purpose of provided functionality). |
| Thu 30 Jan 01:09 | daniel szuc | Adam, same sort of issues out here in Hong Kong.
We have been assisting build the 'usability club' here for approx 1.5 years and still very much in 'education' mode for 2003 :) |
|
| Why VHS was better than Betamax | Mon 27 Jan |
| Read this, and the next time someone tells you that, of course, Betamax was superior to VHS, you can tell them that they are wrong. Its an urban myth. (Comments: Thank you Gabriel White.) |
| Mon 27 Jan 22:25 | Frank Lynch | One of the inferiorities, IIRC, is dealt with shorthandedly: Sony didn't have any control over software — they didn't own a studio at the time — and couldn't guarantee title availability. So since people can't program their VCRs to this day, I can't imagine that pre-recorded tape length was that big an issue 20 years ago.
But i understand and appreciate the larger [ers[ective: don't get lost in the technical details if the product doesn't deliver the basic needs (dealt with at length in Cooper's 'Inmates Are Running The Asylum').
(Sorry for any typos I haven't caught, carrot slicing accident earlier today whilst preparing a seitan She[herds Pie. |
| Mon 27 Jan 23:31 | ~bc | This article is stupid. No one said that BetaMax won the consumer market over VHS. That's obvious. People say 'the recording format of BetaMax was technically superior to that of VHS.' Want proof? Check out a TV station that hasn't gone digital. Bet you find Beta tapes, and no VHS. The industry who knows best (not stupid consumers) chose Beta. Just because 95% of lemmings follow their bretheren off cliffs doesn't make dying superior to living. Insert jab of your choice about an operating system more lemmings use than all other lemmings combined... |
| Tue 28 Jan 03:56 | Mac | Be very, very careful before you believe either side of this story.
I have been looking at the similar 'Qwerty is better than Dvorak' question/myth. Received wisdom is that Dvorak is better than Qwerty, but is unable to displace the Qwerty keyboard because the ubiquity of Qwerty (now that was weird, I almost 'forgot' how to type qwerty!)
The article which supposedly disspelled this myth was published in 1996 in Reason. When I came across references to this article I decided to dig a bit deeper and found a rebuttal to the article.
The co-author of the anti dvorak article has also published a book called Rethinking the Network Economy ( sample chapter here ).
This book also contains a chapter called 'Videocassette Recording: The Betamax Case'. Whilst I haven't read this book, I am assuming that this section will 'explain' why VHS is better than BetaMax.
The author of this book has an agenda, which is to prove that the Free Market is the best possible form of organisation and is never wrong. This means that whenever a supposedly inferior product gains significant market share, the product must be better than its competitors.
I think that the Flat Earth Society has a better case, and I would be very wary about accepting this argument without tracing the source of this information.
By the way, the REAL reason that VHS beat BetaMax in the mass market was that the VHS tapes are bigger than the BetaMax tapes and consumers thought that they were getting more for their money! It may seem silly, but it's true, honest ! |
| Tue 28 Jan 08:13 | Boyink | What I don't get is that if recording time was the crux of the issue, and Beta tapes weren't long enough to record a whole movie, what was on the rental tapes? Or did long movies come in a two-tape set?
The funny thing is I remember my dad buying a Beta unit first, and all it got used for was recording TV - as I recall there simply was no beta-format rental market around us. He later changed to VHS just to be able to rent movies.
And I later worked at a shop that still rented the RCA non-digital movie discs...anyone remember *those* beauties? ;) |
| Wed 29 Jan 23:18 | Joe Clark | Beta tapes, even L-750s, could not record a two-hour movie in highest-quality mode, equivalent to SP on VHS. I *own* a Betamax and adore it (it sits on top of two VHS VCRs) and am something of a fetishist. |
|
| Paid Content Trend Is Dangerous (But Not for the Reason You Think) | Mon 27 Jan |
| In the case of fresh premium news content, most often the only way to access it is via the news site that publishes it. Ergo, its mostly invisible. Thats a pretty lousy marketing proposition. |
| Mon 27 Jan 22:34 | Frank Lynch | This sounds like a whole lot of unnecessary worry to me.
If publishers are concerned about it, they can write a text page that allows the spiders to search their pages without cacheing them, but allowing the spiders to cache free 'abstract' pages.
For a site like Google, it could actually represent an opportunity — whoah, I know people have a problem with facing opportunities, but I don't think Google would.
A user could register with Google, and put their paid sites in their profile. Paid sites could be included or excluded as the user chooses.
This could make the Google user even more loyal than they currently are...
Possibilities abound, gang. |
| Mon 27 Jan 22:43 | John S. Rhodes | Frank, I agree. This is a real business opportunity. |
| Wed 29 Jan 08:46 | Chris | Firstly, as an expat Scot, I like the ability keep up with news at home. I would be willing pay a little extra for it.
Some thoughts: The subscription-to-view model prevents a voyeuristic look at other newspapers: learning about other towns, regions, countries or points of view—this was in part a reason for my initial excitement of having access to the web. There is also the inability to read a single article, share links, sample article quality. Then there is the argument regarding exposure and availability vs. moderate income.
Perhaps there is enough competition that Google News as-is may force newspapers to rethink. Is partial or full subscription the only way to go? |
| Wed 29 Jan 20:34 | Frank Lynch | I actually think we might have been closer to a solution when web usage was just starting: initially (here in the US), usage plans for a service like CompuServe were that you were charged a flat rate for up to a certain number of hours, and then an hourly rate thereafter. In that pricing scheme, and ISP could then redistirbute a portion of its revenues to websites according to usage (although this would require the tallying of statistics, and even if only done in aggregate, some users might object).
For a web site like my Samuel Johnson site (or the site of French manhole covers as another exmaple), this is ideal. It allows users to be butterflies and doesn't require user loyalty for the content provider to get some recompense.
To your point, it would also allow users to experiement more fluidly. |
|
| Voice Interfaces: Assessing the Potential | Mon 27 Jan |
| (useit.com) Ive always thought that Captain Picard would have been much better off with a design that informed him immediately when a shuttle was stolen, without first waiting to be asked. (Comments: How much traffic do I send to Jakob? Wheres the love? Heres an idea. Jakob should hire me to blog for him. Wouldnt that be spicy!?) |
| Tue 28 Jan 03:28 | Mac | John, I'll fight you for that job.
Here is a referral report for useit.com during August 2002 (5 months ago).
I don't know how good these stats are because I can't find any references to webword.com !
This is odd because on August 18 2002 you posted a useit.com link that generated 21 comments. So either the clickthroughs don't appear in this report, or everyone made comments about the link without actually reading the article!
There was a discusssion on joelonsoftware at the same time that generated 64 comments and does appear in the referral report.
You have posted 22 items that link to useit.com since August 2001.
From a quick comparison of the useit.com report and the corresponding webword report, it would appear that useit.com had about 190,000 referrals in Aug 2002 whilst webword.com had about 125,000.
How long will it be until webword overtakes useit in the referrals race? Perhaps useit.com isn't quite as popular as everyone assumes it is?
PS. When will the webword usage stats be published again? They stopped appearing after the server move. |
| Tue 28 Jan 11:51 | Whopper | Jacko misses the elegance of voice I/O in Star Trek. *Most* ship systems are operated by manual control -- key-entry control consoles and monitors, but most systems can be operated by voice too. We see only a handful of tasks operated purely by voice.
The voice command, 'Computer, locate Commander Data,' is entirely useful for voice I/O. If I need to know where Commander Data is _right_now_ I want to ask the computer _right_now_ instead of walking over to a computer and punching a bunch of keys. It's a simple voice request that the computer is preprogrammed to handle.
There are a few instances where voice I/O is used in lieu of keyboard commands. That's fine too. Star Fleet officers can choose what will be the most productive way to interact with the computer. Most often when these voice I/O commands are used it is when the person is lying down, is physically impaired, or is in a thoughtful contemplative mood and doesn't want to be confined to sitting in front of a console. In several cases, voice commands were used when the person didn't know how to operate the manual interface.
There are plenty of times I'd rather not have to touch the keyboard or mouse to interact with my computer. I'd happily ask it things like:
'What's the weather forecast today?'
'What's today's news?' (then hearing titles from my favorite news source)
'Computer, read that last news article to me.'
'Increase font' (when visually reading)
'Page down' (when visually reading) |
|
| Dive Into Premium | Fri 24 Jan |
| A new and better way to experience the Dive Into empire! For only a few cents a day, you get fast, uncluttered access to your favorite Dive Into sites, with premium features available only to subscribers. |
| Mon 27 Jan 16:17 | Anonymous | '...since I don't see why I should give a shit about all you fucking freeloaders. Er, I mean potential customers.'
Makes me want to rush right out and pony up $40 a year. Yeah, I'm sure it's meant in jest. So what?
I hope you find enough people who think your site is worth paying for, as it is your right to do whatever you want with your content.
jB |
| Mon 27 Jan 16:21 | JohnB | Urk. I'm an idiot. That's why no one would ever pay for *my* content...
jB |
|
| WebWord Comment | Tue 21 Jan |
| - How much of an applications interface can be considered intellectual property? As a hypothetical case, if some new blogging service totally ripped off Bloggers interface, could it be called intellectual property theft? Any past cases you can cite? |
| Mon 27 Jan 09:57 | Dave | Regarding standards, Blogger's XML-RPC interface is largely a standard among weblog systems. So should Blogger sue Moveable Type and Userland for 'stealing' their interface?
No, because the whole point of creating the XML-RPC interface was to foster this sort of interoperation between applications. And when applications can agree on a standard interface users can only benefit. Witness what has happened since weblogs have adopted the Blogger interface (and to a lesser extent, the metaWeblogAPI): numerous third-party tools have been created to address needs that noone knew existed before, largely because users had no idea they could use their new tools in so many different ways.
Interface standardization is always a win-win situation between companies and users. Companies who refuse to adopt standards are admitting their product cannot compete on merit alone. |
|
| WebWord Comment | Sun 26 Jan |
| News That Comes to You is a good article about RSS written by J.D. Lasica. Most people tend to think of RSS feeds as being for normal text content, such as blog postings. However, RSS feeds can be used in other ways. For example, why not use RSS feeds to keep customers aware of new products and services? We are doing something like this with Trodos RSS feeds. You can subscribe to see when new items are added to Trodo. Pretty cool, eh? As far as I know, no one else is using RSS in this way. Most people are stuck thinking about RSS as being for news only. Too bad. |
| Mon 27 Jan 01:27 | Matthew Langham | You may like to check out my article on this on the OReilly network: http://www.oreillynet.com/pub/wlg/2426
I wrote about possible uses for RSS such as last-minute vacations or job openings.
Matthew |
| Mon 27 Jan 03:05 | tom | Because both PCs and Macs have RSS Readers (and because iCal is Mac only) we've experimented using RSS to share events between different intranet calendars. And to share 'latest messages' too. |
| Mon 27 Jan 07:24 | Bryan | This is similar to one of the uses of CDF shown in the web part of Microsoft's platform SDK, the path would be
Microsoft SDK\Samples\Web\internet\management\osd |
| Mon 27 Jan 09:10 | John Norris | At john-norris.net, I've been using RSS to change the meaning and physical attributes of conceptual art work.
I'm sure these ideas could be used in other areas as well.
John |
|
| What Should I Do With My Life? | Fri 24 Jan |
| (fastcompany.com) Theres a way out. Instead of focusing on whats next, lets get back to whats ?rst. The previous era of business was de?ned by the question, Wheres the opportunity? Im convinced that business success in the future starts with the question, What should I do with my life? |
| Mon 27 Jan 07:35 | Mac | Have you ever considered that 'Usability' produces a new kind of pod person?
Re 'The double posting': Great minds think alike. |
|
|
