Some Perspective

I think I will end this blog with this post for it is a good way to end with some perspective. With all this technology, I think we sometimes forget to realize the full perspective of things. We are just the smallest of things in the very grand universe. There is just so much out there to be explored.

We shouldn't waste time complaining about why our iPhone application isn't streamlined enough, but instead doing great things - like helping for great causes like my prior post.

Technology is an incredibly great interest of mine. And through technology I think great things can happen.

It is just up to me, up to all of us, to make it so.

Thank You Sincerely For Reading,
-brandon

Project For Awesome

The Project for Awesome, originally organized by the vlogbrothers on youtube officially starts today. I've attached a few of the many submission videos below.







That which makes The Project for Awesome so.. well... awesome, is that it is able to bring so many people together in a digital community. Through shared morale alone, hundreds of thousands of video makers and subscribers are able to work together for a wonderful cause.

Basically, the project works by having everyone rate and comment all of these Project for Awesome videos that are posted on the same day - today, Thursday December 17, 2009. Through rating and commenting these videos, of which all revolve around helping make the world a more awesome place, are able to completely take over the youtube home page, from which millions of other can see them.

The Project for Awesome is an amazing example of how the digital world is helping to connect us all.

Everyone please go, rate, comment, subscribe. Yet more importantly, help the world become a more awesome place.

nyti.ms

I really don't understand this shortened url business. As of recent, the start up company, bit.ly, has become the go-to service for acquiring shortened url's - basically the trick is to register url's in other countries (which you can do), and them forward them to your regular url.

Now, I understand the point of shortening urls for ease of use, but does this not contradict the ease of remembering? Everything knows that if you time in google.com, facebook.com, apple.com, nytimes.com, cnn.com, etc. where it's gonna take us. Primarily because we may use them all the time, but also because its usually just... the name of the company... then .com.

Now if were were to try to find nyti.ms, would it not be equally plausible to search for nytim.es. The problem that has arisen is that companies think we want shortened urls just for the heck of it... and because of Twitter's character limit. Yet two things of which I am certain: Twitter's character limit will be expanded, and urls with an of various domain names are hard as heck to remember?!

Shortening a url just for the sake of making it shorter is kin of silly, and honestly, not that much shorter. In a world of shortened text-speech, I understand fully what these major corporations are thinking. But honestly, I've not once felt that nytimes.com was just too much to type. If I go to a website I just bookmark it and call it a day, otherwise its pretty much a guessing game anyway. And on an ironic note, the only companies trying to shorten their names are the ones that everyone already knows!

Am I alone on the absurdity of this new trend?

Oh 3D...

Now I know I seem to be bringing 3D up a lot lately, but the fact of the matter is, it is like the next new big thing - only not that new, nor that great, nor that big, just kinda... okay.

Regardless, it yet another misuse of 3D, the picture above is from the Cowboys Stadium, in which all fans were given 3D glasses to experience "feeling like you're right in the game"... while watching the game. Ha!

Now don't get me wrong, I understand the push for the technology is relentless, but who really thought this was a good idea?! Wearing 3D glasses may give a little bit of nausea-inducing depth to their huge television, but at a cost of what you may ask? Watching the very game in front of you!

The problem with technology, is that sometimes it fails to realize that it too has specific purposes. In many cases it tries to bring the "real-life" effect to non real life activities (I am still working on my impending haptic technologies write-up). Yet bringing "real-life" to real life?! This just makes no sense to me whatsoever.

If the technology were implemented without a need for glasses (thus allowing for simultaneous watching of the actual game - actually live right in front of you) then I would have considered this idea somewhat respectable.)

But alas, after six minutes of booing fans, maybe HDLogix learned this the hard way.

Mag+ Digital Magazine Concept

Mag+ from Bonnier on Vimeo.

The magazine concept described above touches on quite a few interesting topics. Most centrally, the discussion falls on the understanding, or lackthereof, of how a person interacts and with a magazine construct. When trying to replicate this interaction in a digital manner, Bonnier chose not to simplify 'digify' the magazine-reading process, yet instead to bring out the key distinctions that make a magazine a magazine, while taking advantage of a central digital construct.

One of the continuing failures in many electronic magazine concepts, is the misconception that a new magazine, must be just like the old, but why?! As discussed in the video above, they looked at that which is most important - image integration and text. Magazines central role is of course the focus of the many photos -yet these photos too are supplied with ample text.

Text, as the internet has shown, is easiest to read in a scrolling manner. Sure flipping pages makes it feel like the real thing, yet ultimately, it's nothing more than an unneeded nuance. If instead, one was to look at how the text and images interact, that is we typically look at the photos first, find that which is interesting, then read heading information, and if we are intersting we then dive into the suplemental text - we could then find a much more efficient design for a digital magazine concept.

The concept above brings up these points and finds solutions that not only seem very efficient, but also intuitive.

As technology comes to terms with this realization, I question if e-book readers themselves will be forced to make a transition as well. Sure e-books are supposed to be just like book, but as of this writing - the refresh rate upon pressing the next-page button is terribly slow. Granted scrolling as of now is not yet readily possible.

Regardless, the folks over at Bonnier seem to be looking at technology from the right viewpoint. As the digital age continues to take over all of our old media platforms, we must take advantage of an opportunity to improve upon these platforms - not just move them to LCD screens.

Gustav Eiffel

I ran across an interesting article yesterday while scanning the internets. Apparently Wednesday December 16, 1832 commemorates the birth and life of Gustav Eiffel. As it is probably already apparent, Eiffel was the architect and designer of such amazing structures as the Garabit viaduct, the iron structure of the Statue of Liberty (Enlightening the World), and of course the Eiffel Tower. Accomplishing all of these feats before the turning of the 20th century, landmarks that remain visible nearly a century thereafter is amazing to me.

As technology continually progresses we see the lifespan of these enormously complex system dwindle from a few years, to sometimes just one or less. Sure some people may carry such devices around for a few years thereafter, but for a device to last for over a century! - impossible.

Don't get me wrong, designing a device to be sold on the market as opposed to designing a building are two very different tasks with two very different purposes.

It's just amazing. That a single person could design two very different things with their very hands. In 100 years one thing may never be thought of, while another stands in the minds of millions.

Yet I suppose this is the continual endeavor of art.

Technology is not art, though technology can be used in artistic ways, as I have analyzed on a number of ocassions. Regardless, the point of this blog is to bring up the memory of an incredible designer, and just as importantly the idea of time in what we create. Tech niches will only last for a very short period of time, whether we are referring to the iPhone or Facebook, but designs with a much deeper, significant meaning - may be our only means of standing the test of time.

Google Phone

As the perpetual rumor mill continues, it seems quite an interesting product has been designed by none other than Google itself. The device you see above, is ironically enough, a "Google Phone" dubbed the Nexus One. The irony comes in the fact that Google designed Android, its open-sourced operating system, as just that - an open-sourced option for a multitude of other carriers. Though the idea of Google bringing its own phone to the market may sound interesting, realize its resounding effects.

Bringing such a phone to market would directly contradict the purpose of Android. If this phone were to run on this software, than what advantage would Google have in selling this phone over existing handsets - especially if it is going to be offered as an unsubsidized, unlocked option, as discussed.

If this were the case, the the only successful model for selling such a phone would mean that Google would need to make its device somewhat distinct from rest of the competition - that is incorporate qualities not yet found in other devices. Incorporating such technologies would directly contradict what the Open Handset Alliance and Android is all about!

I hope, as is rumored, this is just a developer phone for testing software and nothing more. I sure hope so, else I foresee a very unstable Android market in the near future.