30 Apr 2010
I live in a gated apartment complex in Athens, GA and since the complex is downtown we need security officers to man the gate so that non-residents don’t piggy-back in the gate. This is especially important on days when UGA has games, namely football. There was one time when I left on a Saturday to get groceries only to come back and not find a parking spot because there were so many non-residents in the parking deck taking up spaces that belong to residents. I had to wait like half an hour for someone to leave.
Anyways, I was walking home tonight from the bars and there’s this security guard who always mans the gate late at night – real nice fellow. He had this bored, almost sad look on his face and his hair was disheveled. I’ve talked to the guy before and it seems that all he wants in his night is someone to talk to. Despite all the drunken people – men stumbling home with ladies who’s tops are half way off their shoulders – I’m sure it’s lonely and bored checking for parking deck stickers all night long.
It kind of reminded me of the homeless man who sits patiently on Clayton Street who doesn’t beg, but waits – waits for a dollar, some change, or even some recognition. I walked home tonight and big him a good night, as I always do, and his silence was broken as if I’d paid him in diamonds. As with the security guard, I’ve taken a few minutes to talk to him, see what’s going, ask him if he’s heard or seen anything interesting… and it seems to perk him right up.
Sometimes a conversation, a “hello” or even just a smile can go a long way.
Note: This post was going to be about the couple who piggy-backed into my apartment complex after paying the security officer with a smile and a flirt, but I decided to make it more inspirational. I realize this might cancel out the optimism you had previously and I apologise.
17 Dec 2009
I’ve been reading Don Norman’s The Design of Everyday Things and I must say I am thoroughly enjoying it. It was written a few decades ago so some of the stuff to the reader might seem funny. For example, Norman makes a big deal about computers – because they were relatively new at the time of the book – and VCRs, which were also fairly new. The underlying principles of usability and the cognitive approaches to memory and mappings are still very valid today.
My favorite example thus far has been the example of door handles. When it comes to doors, you can push them open, pull them open, or slide them open, but take away the handle and you have no idea how to open the door. Handles are very indicative of function and as a result should be designed to clearly describe how the door opens, otherwise you slam your face into it, or, in the case of Mr. Norman’s friend, get stuck between two sets of glass doors.
Good design doesn’t need instruction. A door should be easy to use without having to use the words “PUSH”, “PULL”, or “SLIDE”, and handles should be designed obviously. Consider the following examples:
These doors are clearly made to be pushed open.
Without the words PUSH, you'd probably pull these doors.
These handles signify pulling. The PUSH label only makes it confusing. This company chose asthetics over functionality. These labels were probably added after the doors were installed because people were having trouble opening the doors.
This could be the Nielsen/Norman coming out in me, but notice the first set of doors is the least attractive but the most usable? It’s nice to make something look attractive, but if you take away the usability in the process, you’ve only made the product worse. Part of usability is reducing or eliminating the requirement for users to think. Essentially it’s dumbing things down for the lowest common denominator of users. Good designers can create things that are not only very attractive, but also very usable.
20 Jul 2009
A good friend of mine recently calmed my abhoration for Microsoft and/or bing, the new search engine from Microsoft that is a direct competitor to Google which we all know and love. What was a blatant and probably over-the-top hatred for bing, including but not limited to commercials, advertisements, and other assorted sightings, turned into an opinionated distaste based on personal preferences rather than emotional ones.
(Thank you)
I’m a fan of simplicity – less is more. If it’s not needed, it’s wasteful, so get rid of it. Maybe I’ve learned a tad too much from Jakob Nielsen and have taken a liking to stark, graphic-less layouts that allow nothing to compete with usability? Or maybe I just like to hate “the man”? Ever since I learned about Google I fell in love with the simplicity of it all, which is effectively and efficiently tailored simple, quick searches. After all, the act of searching is to accomplish one thing and one thing only: to search. Why then, must I have to look at all this other mumbo jumbo that does nothing but distracts me from my goal? This is what I thought when I saw bing for the first time.
Sure, the site looks pretty, but am I really going to be spending more than five seconds on the bing homepage? Not likely. If it’s not needed, get rid of it. My initial reaction was, “Search engines make a killing off of advertisements and paid listings… Microsoft just wants more money!” But I guess what matters more than the initial appearance of the search engine is how it lists its search results. I’d say, depending on what you search for, bing and Google are comparable, with bing having better presentation at times and Google having better presentation at other times.
The fact that bing was even created was beyond me. Why try to fix what’s not broken? The same thing goes with the next generation Zunes – Microsoft had an obvious fail with it when Apple controls the MP3 player market, yet they’re trying again. I’d sit and stress over things like the Zune and bing, but for what? I prefer Google and Apple, why do I care what they do?
Then we discussed competition and how it’s good that Microsoft came out with bing because it will keep Google on their toes and if Google is on their toes, it means better functionality, results presentations, and a better overall product for us users. So very true! And for those who wish to use bing, you can be sure Microsoft is trying hard to produce a product that’s better than Google. It’s really a win-win situation for everyone, but I didn’t realize that until this weekend.
But simply out of curiosity, for those of you who’ve used both, which do you prefer and why? And if results are equal, do you prefer the added visuals and graphics of bing, or the simplicity and “to-the-point” of Google?
05 Mar 2009
Okay, so seeing Sawyer wearing a Dharma jumpsuit kinda threw me off a little. And knowing they were living on the island in the 70s just added to the confusion. It appears the show is based on fate and no matter what the survivors do to leave the island, they’ll somehow find their way back to it because they’re supposed to be on the island.
I have a feeling this relates to the time-jumping, I just don’t know how quite yet. We have been shown and it has been proven that they have in fact been to the island before. Last night we saw the temptation to use the submarine to escape, but instead they ended up staying on the island. What we haven’t seen is how they got back sometime after the 70s to lead “normal” lives elsewhere. We also haven’t seen proof of use for the submarine as the only times people have left the island have either returned “like a snowglobe” or ended up in the desert – the supposed “exit point”.
I’m beginning to wonder more about Ben’s involvement. Does he know they’ve been on the island before and just isn’t telling them? Is that why he’s so concerned? Or back in Season 1 when he saw the plane split he seemed to know exactly what to do, as if he has someone in mind.
And is John Locke even more important than we think? Or is he just so blinded by faith that he’s the easiest to manipulate? Ben sure does know how to get him going.
And finally, we’ve seen Richard stay the same age over 50 or so years. Why is the only one not aging?
This weeks’ episode was absolutely fantastic, to say the least. As more secrets are revealed about the group and the island the more questions we ask. But it’s nice to see how things are beginning to tie together as well. The show is getting to a point where the last season, more specifically the last few episodes (evar!) are going to either make the show go out with a happy, memorable, award-winning bang, or leave the millions of viewers mighty disappointed. All in all though, regardless of whether you love or hate the show, or are simply baffled by it, it has been one amazing trip.
Oh and one other thing. I’m assuming the island wasn’t moving during the 70s. I say this because the leader (that long haired guy with glasses) said the submarine would take them to Tahiti. So he must’ve known the islands whereabouts. Something to keep in mind, I guess.
16 Feb 2009
Utilitarianism is “the idea that the moral worth of an action is determined solely by its contribution to overall utility: that is, its contribution to happiness or pleasure as summed among all persons. It is thus a form of consequentialism, meaning that the moral worth of an action is determined by its outcome: put simply, the ends justify the means.” I feel I’m very much utilitarian. When it comes to website design I believe (rather strongly) that form follows function. I believe that less is more. And I believe the web is and should be an extremely useful tool. Tools, as we know, are not full of fluff. They exist to perform a task or to make performing tasks easier and more efficient.
When it comes to my life, I tend to believe the ends justify the means. In a way, form follows function. All that really matters is the outcome. Are you happy? No? Then do whatever it takes to get happy by any means necessary. Maybe that’s selfish, but it is my life, right? Who should I be living for? Often this means you compromise more for the in-between things, giving of yourself for the greater good – the greater happiness. You back down rather than take stands. You give in rather than fight. Or you suck it up when shit sucks because you know that after a long bout of darkness, the sun will rise, and after being so deprived it will be the most beautiful sight.
In a way, you die so that you may live.
I was trying to find an opposite to utilitarianism, but got to thinking that there may not be one. Of course everyone desires to be completely happy, we just all find that happiness differently. Some ruthlessly and recklessly hack their way to the top while others find happiness in higher beings. In the end though, all that matters is our happiness. When we die, we die either reflecting on how happy we are or we die regretting doing this or that, or even not doing this or that.