For more reasons than I can count, this is coolest (and biggest) egg I’ve ever seen.
This “Cybertecture Egg” by James Law is scheduled to be built in Mumbai India, pushing the limits of architecture and design. But its not just the shape that makes this building remarkable. James Law is known for “Cybertecture” – his special brand of architecture for the 21st century that brings together architecture, environmental design, intelligent control systems, and evolutionary engineering. These buildings of the future are highly conceptual and pushing the limits of what a “green building” entails.»
Say what you want about e-books. Most people I know are still taking a lot of time to adjust to the thought of reading a book that isn’t on paper.
But the Kindle, Nook, and iPad/iPhone are here to stay. Many of the pioneers of ‘geekery’ are pleasantly satisfied with the tech-read experience. I’m among the satisfied readers with more than six e-books I’ve read now from cover-to-cover in various apps and using e-ink displays as well as iDevices.
The trick to a good e-reading experience isn’t so much in the app as it is in the content. As far as reading books are concerned, the content is especially king. No one wants to pay for a lousy book, as so many books in print and digital are.
For example, I spoke with an acquaintance who is in highschool. He explained that he’s been given a reading assignment, and with iBooks he download the e-pub version of this big book for convenience.
Regrettably, the introduction section of the book in his assignment is more than 200 pages long. The book in and of itself is a snooze. This alone killed his enthusiasm for e-readers. Since it is such a chore just to read his book assignment, it’s dulled any desire he had for the iPad’s e-reader wizardry.
On the other hand, I’ve read several popular fictional works, and a few superb non-fictional business related books. Since I got to pick, I chose books that I knew would interest me that came highly recommended. My e-reading experience—especially with iBooks, which works oh-so elegantly on the iPad—has been some of my favorite experiences with tech in my life.
The burden of a good read with any book is found in the content. Don’t put the blame on an app if you don’t have a positive experience.
It’s no secret that smartphones are our personal assistants. Now, they are becoming our nurses.
We’re only scratching the surface with the solutions we have available today. Scientists from Korea’s Advanced Institute of Science technology recently finished tests which proved those touch-sensitive displays you use every day on your iPhone can theoretically be used to detect biomolecular material as efficiently as more traditional medical testing equipment.
In plain English, this means the smartphone you’re already using could be used for blood analysis, cancer screening, diabetes checking and all manner of other tests. If this research is extended then every doctor the planet using a smartphone will have use of a complete medical testing lab in their pocket.»
The medical practice as the world has known it the last 100 years is in for a complete redo.
Over the last year or so, the filmmaking geeks have had to make a tough choice: did they want to use Apple’s Final Cut Pro editing suite, or the Adobe Creative film related suite for their productions.
This was no small or easy choice. I was right in the thick of it. The Internet was all a buzz when Final Cut Pro X was released on the Mac App Store. For the record, I chose to stick with Apple’s pro software, and here’s why.
Apple was there at the beginning of the PC. They technically created the personal computer, then other software and hardware developers hijacked Apple’s ideas. I don’t mind saying that I like “the original.” I appreciate knowing the products I use come from developers that are willing to take great risks; developers, like Apple, that are truly creative and shake things up. Apple didn’t know the original Macintosh would work, let alone sell. But they believed in it, and they saw to it the invention came to market for other like-minded people that would appreciate the same sort of computing experience. As it turned out, there were a lot of people that appreciated the Macintosh, and the naysayers ultimately immitated the Mac whether they cared for it or not.
Flash forward to the iPod. Apple invented the iPod—not the mp3 player, but they reinvented the concept and knocked one out of the park with the iPod and iTunes. They essentially re-wrote the way music is delivered, and the way music is played, and the way music is enjoyed. Others are imitators at best, and as we all know, Zunes and the like can’t match the iPod.
Then there is the iPhone, and there is the iPad. Enough said.
My point with the back stories is to show the pattern in Apple’s product deliveries. They produce solid gear and software in spite of the critics and their sometimes outlandish criticism for Apple’s simplistically. Simplicity in Apple’s case is genius. Macs, iPods, iPhones, and iPads stand as testaments to Apple’s standard for all they do—they don’t just represent their consumer level products; they are the poster children for how Apple creates and offers all of their products.
But there are many skeptics, and almost all of them couldn’t believe that Apple’s pro software would compare well with Adobe’s. Well, they are sorely wrong.
I’ve used Macs and PCs. I’ve used almost all of the Adobe Creative Suite apps at one time or other. But professionally I’ve stuck by Final Cut Pro because it is the original. FCP is the app that reinvented editing and post-effects as we know it.
While FC X may look easy and simple to use, many pros figured it wouldn’t be robust. To be sure, the first release of Final Cut X lacked features that many broadcast professionals really desire. Without their satisfaction, FC X didn’t stand a chance in the pro market.
But now, about a year after FC X was released, we see a different picture. Apple stuck with it, and the professional tools that were missing are all added to the most up-to-date version of Final Cut.
Apple usually gets it right. They usually are the originators—or capable discoverers—of great tools and new software standards. They re-invent all the time. That’s what Apple does, and that’s what Final Cut Pro demonstrates.
But re-inventing editing as we know it in the 21st century came with a price. Many of the FCP 7 and FCP 6 users jumped ship when X was released. I understand pros are a cantankerous bunch, and as difficult as they are to please, Adobe and even the likes of Avid had tools to offer that out-performed the first release of FCP X.
This is regrettable not for Apple, but for the suckers that straddled the fence and went with Adobe’s suite in spite of their intuition telling them they should stick with Final Cut’s suite and give it a chance. Pros are, like all people, subject to peer pressure. There is a lot of pride to go around among filmmakers. And they take their reputations way too seriously. Well, for those that straddled the fence and turned to the dark side in the end… switching to Adobe’s suite entirely probably cost them a lot, because I really believe there are a great number of Premiere users today that only a short while ago were loyal to Final Cut that needlessly spent time learning Adobe’s gargantuan editing systems all for not.
Here’s a demonstration of one brilliant yet deceptively simple execution of a professional production in the works using Motion 5 (part of the Final Cut suite):
Final Cut’s community, as we know it today, is still growing. There are new users, and there are many that made the switch from FC 7 to FC X. Then, there are even many that prefer to use Final Cut Pro X in addition to Adobe’s Premiere! Why? Because they find the grass is always greener on the other side. What they overlook is that it’s also costly, time-consuming, and mind-boggling.
Motion 5 and Final Cut Pro X make a great team. They are most-definitely professional grade, and they get the job done where it counts. Are they the most expensive, feature rich, extraterrestrial apps known to filmmakers? No. But neither is Premiere. Don’t you know there is always a bigger fish? It is said Avid trumps Premiere, and that Premiere trumps Final Cut. Well, quite frankly, I think the small fry is easier to handle than the whales, and I am doing just fine with Final Cut’s set of powerful editing tools.
Not to mention the great plugins you can get at affordable prices from the growing developer communities:
Adobe offers a great package, and I know it’s great for a great number of editors. My point is that it’s not for everyone, and Final Cut Pro X is certainly a professional option that’s easy to learn, cost-effective, well-supported, and at the cusp of everything film as we will know it in the 21st century.
Oh, and did I mention that Premiere CS6 is imitating Final Cut Pro X? Children, that’s called ‘hypocrisy’.
If you are intrigued with Final Cut X, but haven’t take the plunge, or if you have the app and want help to get started, then check out Izzy’s free online tutorials. You won’t be disappointed.
It’s not often that camera technology genuinely excels in a peculiar way. What I mean by “peculiar:” in a way uncharacteristic of manufacturers. Camera technology developers normally prevent groundbreaking evolutions of their products from seeing the mass market. Incremental—almost untraceable—improvements are made in each new generation of digital photography gear. Frankly, IMHO, camera tech is way behind the advancements of other gadgetry industries.
But then there is Lytro which has broken from the mold. It’s a significant camera concept that should change everything as we know it for how photography is captured and edited. Imagine changing focus and contrast in your photos naturally and natively from within the photo’s meta data, so to speak. With all the data captured at the moment the photo was taken the Lytro gives you the highest quality ever—frankly, never been seen before by other camera conventional technologies.
Hopefully Lytro will get the other manufacturers out of their lazy stupor.
App creates patents for new inventions from time to time, in case you didn’t know. Some are rather boring, and many of them will never see production, but there are some that are attention-getting, and there are those you will probably be purchasing in the not-so distant future.
This one is attention-getting. The theoretical device would be a steering wheel iPod touch-based controller. It doesn’t look like much, but I don’t have to tell you that it would be super convenient to use.
A lot of car stereos still don’t offer the iPhone and iPod controls from the dashboard controls of the stereo. This would be a preferable solution for consumers that don’t want to overhaul their stereo system simply to control their iDevices from the dash.
All in all, I’m in favor of this product. It wouldn’t make a big splash, but it’s akin to the Nike athletic wear gadgetry Apple makes. That little gimmick really works for athletes and their iPods. Well, this car controller would be a nice gimmick for the rest of us.
It sort of reminds me of a Kickstarter campaign project. Maybe that’s what Apple should do. I’m sure they would get their money’s worth. ;-)
It’s too bad there isn’t a way to listen to music from inside the helmet for motorcyclists (or am I wrong?). I imagine it is considered dangerous to impair a driver’s hearing. But if it were legal and safe, wouldn’t it be cool? To control your iPhone and iPod with one of these attached to the handle bars? It would look trendy, I think.
Read all about the device and it’s related patents on the go-to source for all Apple patentry: PatentlyApple.com.
I searched the keywords “Apple Koolaid” on Twitter. In the short list of the top 20 people who came up related to the subject, Microsoft was the 19th.You’re free to speculate what this means, or just read the title for this post to tell you what I think. »
Windows Phone, Microsoft Office, Windows Live, Bing, and Internet Explorer are all represented with Twitter accounts, and they all are on the top 25 people related to “Apple Koolaid.” Of course, the way Twitter updates the trends constantly, this is not join got stay as such all the time.
37Signals’ Jason Fried wrote a short piece in the May issue of Inc. Magazine. He tells how his company launched the newest version of Basecamp, the popular online project management web app. I’ve used Basecamp a few times on projects in the past. It is a good tool, and like all good tools they need to get majorly updated every now and then. But Basecamp’s update was so significant that many loyal users complained…. How did 37Signals respond, and what did they learn from their problematic predicament?
Out with the Old…
Basecamp has a large user base as far as online tools are concerned. 37Signals isn’t going to let that die simply by keeping up things as they are. What they built five or so years ago isn’t going to cut it for the next five years. They are going to take advantage of the new; what makes technology great in the here and now.
But 37Signals didn’t seem ready after they made their significant changes and launch of the new and improved Basecamp. Many users were not charmed or happy with the new interface. This is where 37Signals made a judgment call: Jason Fried tells in the Inc. article that in retrospect they would have had considerably less complaints from their loyal consumers (small business and the like) with the new Basecamp had it “not been so inviting.” Older experienced users that were happy with Basecamp ‘Classic’ needlessly switched on the new to give it a test drive, and afterward they realized they didn’t want the new to replace the old. Basecamp Classic was where they belonged with their large ongoing projects.
But the new Basecamp didn’t let users revert to the older version.
Where 37Signals Put the Blame
Jason concludes they should have encouraged their users to try out or read up on the new Basecamp but not to make it so easy for users to make the switch from the old to the new. Had they given happy Basecamp Classic users pause before they flipped the switch, they might have understood that the new was not for them at the time. Then, they would have made the switch at a later time when they really wanted the new Basecamp and it didn’t interfere with ongoing business.
Jason is right in one sense. No one wants to be told that “the new is the best thing ever” only to find that it’s “simply different” in actuality. Basecamp users felt they had a lot to learn about the new Basecamp, and that would slow down their current active projects; losing their momentum. Basecamp customers complained because their anxiety rows very quickly.
Not all customers were bothered by the new. New customers were happy. 37Signals got well over 10,000 new users in a short window of time thanks to the new. So launching the new was not a mistake, and, I think, while Jason’s point that the elder users ought to have been more prepared still stands, it was not the real problem.
Jason put the burden of the problem back on his customers—some of his most loyal customers. Surely you see the dilemma here.
The real problem: Basecamp was not able to give back the Basecamp Classic user interface upon demand.
Vimeo Did It Right
About four months ago or so (at a time when business would be slower for many companies), Vimeo introduced their new web interface to their users. If you want to tour the new design, there offered a page that demonstrated the new features, and a video that made the new look very appealing to the eye:
However, Vimeo understood many of their users would need more time to adjust. They have many exceptionally loyal and happy users with the old—why rock the boat?
So Vimeo made the best decision possible under these circumstances: they made it an option for users to switch back and forth from the old version of Vimeo to the new and back again. Loyal users could dabble and go back to the familiar at any time they pleased.
I have not heard one complaint about Vimeo’s transition. Users were excited about it and it has attracted new users that see Vimeo making the effort to keep up with web standards.
37Signals Will Lose Customers’ Respect
37Signals gets a lot of things right in their impressive online tools, but it’s poor logic to say “we simply should have given our users a fair warning about making the switch.” This is to say, “We don’t honestly care about all the concerns our loyal users may have. We’re interested in new customers and expanding.” Backwards compatibility doesn’t seem all that important or relevant to Jason Fried.
In contrast, Vimeo made the statement through their plan to support the old and the new, “We care about all of you—the old and the new. We’re here to care for each of our customers’ legitimate concerns. Some people need the option to go back. We know it will mean more work, but we’re going to make it possible.” Last I checked, last week, you can still use the old Vimeo—four months after the new Vimeo launched—if you like.
Vimeo has gained a lot of respect from old and new users simply because it seems they care about their users. Not only that, but they don’t talk critically about their users in a magazine. Jason Fried shuffled a lot of the blame off of 37Signals in the Inc. Magazine article. I don’t know that he intended it so, but consciously or unconsciously, that’s how it read, and that’s how the writer of the article pitched Jason’s point of view. That’s all that matters.
IMHO, that is why Basecamp is only a good product by a decent company, and not a great product by a great company, like Vimeo.
A new report by The Wall Street Journals claims Apple will be announcing a series of new features for iCloud at WWDC, including a revamped photo sharing system with support for user comments.
The new features, expected to be announced at Apple’s world-wide developer conference beginning June 11, will allow iCloud users to share sets of photos with other iCloud users and to comment on them, these people said. Currently, users can only store one set of photos in iCloud through a feature called Photo Stream, which is designed to sync those photos to other Apple devices, not share them. »
This is not a good idea unless Apple makes a complete overhaul of the current photo sharing tools and iCloud photo interface. This would suggest they dramatically update iPhoto along with the iCloud photo tools?
Apple adding comments to Photos Stream suggests they are taking an interest in offering a Flickr alternative to iCloud users. Along with adding comments there should be a means to select which photos you want visible to only yourself, to the public, or to a select group. If this is the case, iPhoto, along with the built in features of Photo Stream, will get a lot more complicated. For instance, would this mean you can read comments in iPhoto? Are they appended to photos or whole galleries? Will you be able to read the comments and see the photos without an iCloud account? Will you add and view comments in your Photo Stream on iOS?
The usefulness of photos and collections of photos into galleries has been stretched too thin. Apple’s not especially gifted when it comes to social network tools (I
. Apple is wiggling away from their value of simplicity if they go through with this, which is why I don’t think this rumor is entirely true. There will most likely be changes to iPhoto and/or Photo Stream at the WWDC, but comments will not be one of them unless the interface is an especially aggressive departure from what Photo Stream is today.
Say what you want about e-books. Most people I know are still taking a lot of time to adjust to the thought of reading a book that isn’t on paper.
Over the last year or so, the filmmaking geeks have had to make a tough choice: did they want to use Apple’s Final Cut Pro editing suite, or the Adobe Creative film related suite for their productions.
It’s not often that camera technology genuinely excels in a peculiar way. What I mean by “peculiar:” in a way uncharacteristic of manufacturers. Camera technology developers normally prevent groundbreaking evolutions of their products from seeing the mass market. Incremental—almost untraceable—improvements are made in each new generation of digital photography gear. Frankly, IMHO, camera tech is way behind the advancements of other gadgetry industries.
37Signals’ 
