Ludwig Wendzich

Developing Weekly Retrospect’s UI has got me thinking about a lot of different interactions that I’ve never thought about before, specifically because of the difference between abstract manipulation of content (using a mouse) and direct manipulation of content (using your hand.)

I never quite understood why my grandparents said “Go up” when I used to scroll email or web pages for them (before she learnt how to use a mouse) when she actually wanted me to scroll down. Even my mother’s older sister would also use the terminology of “scrolling up” when she actually meant scrolling down.

I now see that they saw the content moving upwards so they thought it was “going up” when in fact I was moving the “viewport” down. The viewport is what we see at any point in time. When we read a book we move our viewport by looking over to the next page. When we read a newspaper we move the viewport around the the newspaper that we hold in front of us. Very seldom do we see the content moving around within our viewport (unless it is actually moving), instead it is our viewport that moves around the content. So when they see content moving up within their viewport they interpret this not as the viewport itself moving down the page but as the physically content moving upward.

I came across this issue when coding the Natural Human Interface interactions for Weekly Retrospect. Keyboard keys move the viewport around (like traditional scrollers) so a right arrow key will move the “viewport” to the right. To achieve the same effect with a Natural Human Interface we have to come up with an interaction (or gesture) whose effect in reality would mimic what is being shown on screen. As what is been shown on screen looks like content moving from the right of the viewport to the left of the viewport, an appropriate gesture is one which would physically move the content, like dragging from right to left.

So a motion which goes toward the left translates to a keyboard key that points to the right. This isn’t amazing or revolutionary, just something I thought was interesting. An understanding of abstract (Mouse and Keyboard) and direct (Natural Human Interfaces) manipulation and why they relate to each other the way they do.

This is also why I believe the iPad is going to be so revolutionary. My grandparents and aunt who never got the hang of abstract manipulation won’t need to because their interaction with the device will be direct (natural).

A recent uproar about the introduction of internet filtering in NZ follows on the heels of the great outrage at the Australian government’s choice to enforce internet filtering. In NZ, the filtering is optional and so far Telecom, TelstraClear and Vodafone have all opted in.

EDIT: Orcon is also working to implement this. And MaxNet CEO, John Hanna, says “Filtering out child pornography is also very much in line with our company values — our customers would be disappointed to hear if we weren’t participating. So participation for us has always been a no-brainer.” (source) Ask your customers if they want their internet filtered, not whether they think child pornography should be banned. - LW.

The reason we require internet filtering is because of the prevalence of child pornography in little old God’s Own apparently. Who can oppose this move without seemingly supporting child pornography? I strongly oppose child pornography almost as much as I oppose this internet filter. Child pornography is an evil that needs to be eradicated, sure, but it affects a handful of people and may never have an impact on most people’s lives. Do not read this incorrectly and think that I suggest child pornography is not a big problem and not one that seriously harms those involved because that is not what I’m suggesting.

Child pornography destroys lives. Internet filtering, and the bigger issue, a suppression of freedom and choice, destroys our society.

We all know and have read the dystopian novel by George Orwell, “1984” and we all know that one of the slogans of the Party is “Freedom is Slavery.” The idea that by restricting our choices to only good ones, removing all evil alternative choices, will lead to a better society. This idea is flawed in that it doesn’t understand that good can only exist where evil is an alternative.

Who is a good citizen if they never turn from a bad choice? What makes a good decision good, if there is no choice involved?

Freedom is the foundation of modern society. Yes, some people will abuse that freedom, but most do not. It is our choice what we do, what we see, what we hear and what we say and not that of our government. It is our choice to be good and not to be evil, for if the government take away that choice, then nothing can be evil, or good.

Today filtering is used to eradicate something we all agree is evil, but tomorow it may be used to eradicate something a little more grey, between obviously good and obviously evil. And the next?

Yes, freedom means some people will make the wrong choices, but it protects us from ignorance and allows us to choose to be good.

Last year I had 3 New Year Resolutions goals, all to do with doing something new and expanding horizons:

• Regularly attend gym
  This was so that I could keep up with friends who I would no longer see everyday at high school but also because I had stopped playing hockey.
• Learn to play guitar
  This was something I had always wanted to do, play music. It started when I was five and wanted to play violin and morphed into various instruments including the piano and drums (my favourite air-instrument remains the drums.)
• Write a book
  I wanted to become a writer. I love writing — in high school I co-founded a writing group which lasted a couple of years and I loved every bit of it.

How’d I go? Well I still regularly attend gym and love it! I’m getting better and better at playing the guitar; I am now able to quickly learn and play the rhythm part of songs and have a decent library of chords etc. I’m fanatical about learning all the names and then naming chords when I see someone else play!

I have started a book; it didn’t go so well during the year — I felt like it was difficult to sit down and write. I have write 30k+ words and am about halfway through the story. What I have written I have edited a couple of times which I think is the problem, I should keep writing before reworking what I have written! Although my book is still chugging along slowly (I didn’t complete the goal of writing the book in a year but I will finish this book), my goal to essentially write more did sort of work out. I started blogging for the 3News Technology section which I enjoy (but admit has been a bit too focused on Vodafone’s SMS pricing!)

I plan to continue these three goals. This year, I plan to try more!

• Read more.
  I think last year I read two books (The Lost Symbol and Nineteen-Eighty-Four) which excludes everything I had to read for research for my studies. I plan to read more, especially Classics or books which have had an effect on pop-culture (like 1984.)
• Run a business
  At the end of last year I went through the process of setting WebCreative up as a sole trader firm which means that I’m finally going to have to track all finances to do with the business. To be honest I’m not looking forward to this, it’s a bit scary, but I’m glad I finally did this.
• Break out of my box
  I want to push the boundaries of who “Ludwig” is this year. I’m excited to go shooting (and possibly even hunting) with one of my good friends this year, despite this being something nobody thought I’d want to do. I’m toying with the idea of getting a Private Pilot’s License (I know, expensive! But if I get it over a few years it could be good) just because it’s different (extraordinary) and exciting. And I’m keeping my eyes open for other opportunities like these!

Let’s see how this works out.

Whilst building the new version of WebCreative, I wanted to create sliding panels that on hover open up to their natural height and on blur closed down to a certain height.

This was used as part of a portfolio. The image would be absolutely positioned as background to article. The image is included in the HTML (see HTML) and not using background: url(); in the CSS because it’s part of the content. section is consequently absolutely positioned over the background image and only reveals all the content on hover.

I wanted to use jQuery but the .slideUp() and .slideDown() didn’t work for this effect as they were just aliases of .hide() and .show() which meant that the drawers would collapse to a height of 0. Now a callback using css() could be set to change the height after the show()/hide() functions were called but that was extremely jumpy.

So instead I wrote this script, based off Code Expander, for my particular solution.

		$(document).ready(function(){
				$("body>section article section").each( function(){
					
					var _startHeight = parseInt($(this).css("height")); // note #1
					$(this).children("p").css("height", "48px") //note #2
							.parents("section").mouseenter( function() {
								$(this).children("p").animate({ height: _startHeight});
							}) //note #3
							.parents("article").mouseleave( function() {
								$(this).children("section").children("p").animate({ height: "48px"});
							}); //note #4
				}); //end each
			});

Note #1: stores the natural height of the element you want to animate as a variable. In my case the height of the section tag is due to the height of the p tag that I want to transform so I just used its height.

Note #2: sets the starting height of the element you want to animate (its half-closed state)

Note #3: on mouseenter of the parent element (section) I want to transform the child-element p so that it’s height returns to its natural height (which recorded in a variable during Note #1)

Note #4: on mouseleave of the parent-parent element article I want the child-child element p to return to its half-closed state (height of 48px).

You can use this with different HTML by changing the selector parts of the script (the initial selector ($("body>section article section")) and then the subsequent parent() and child() selectors.

The HTML I used is below:

			<article>
				<section>
					<h3>Project Title</h3>
					<a href="w#">View site</a>
					<p>Testimonial or project description would go here.</p>
				</section>
				<img src="portfolio_item.jpg">
			</article>

It’s been said that Generation X grew up with the internet and that Generation Y is growing up with mobile. With all this focus on mobile, there must be some exciting things happening the software space, right?

Let’s first take a look at the PC space: Windows is ubiquitous and suffers from version bloat, but it’s there and almost every PC maker has access to it. Apple’s Macintosh may have a smaller market share but their focus on high-end products means they make most of the industry profits. Apple’s strict control of their operating system (Human Interface Guidelines etc) and the fact that it’s so easy to use (there’s only version and anything for Mac will just work on it) means that it’s often held as the gold standard in operating systems. Linux; it exists, but not really.

In the mobile space: Apple holds the same place — lower market share but high-end high-quality products means high profits and customer satisfaction; the gold standard. What’s different is that the Linux offer (Google’s Android is based on a Linux kernel) and the offering from Redmond has switched places. There are many versions of Linux on PC but no-one cares because it’s not really good enough for average consumers to use. There are many versions of Windows Mobile too, but no-one except die-hard WinMo fans care; it’s just not good enough. Android OS is the new Windows (in PC land) of the mobile space.

There are so many versions of Android out right now: 1.5, 1.6, 2.0 and then you get the layers that manufacturers add like Sense and TouchFLO. The thing is, Android is easy for manufacturers to use with their phones so they use it (just like Windows.) The experience may not be that of the iPhone, but it’s good enough for out-of-the-box use. Most people aren’t going to bother updating their phone unless you encourage them to do so or unless they buy a new handset, so just like Windows (PC) most people won’t upgrade. This is ok for manufacturers but is it good for developers? And consumers?

Just like Apple’s Mac OS X users, Apple’s Mobile OS X users are actively encouraged to upgrade to the latest and greatest version of the OS. And it’s made very simple thanks to iTunes. This means developers know that they have a standard to develop to and they know that most people who have ever bought a device will be able to install their application. Unlike with Android where if I develop for Android 2.0, I’ll be missing out on almost all of the G1, HTC Magic etc users who aren’t tech-savvy enough to go to HTC’s (of whichever manufacturer) website and download the latest ROM. This means developers’ market is effectively segmented into different OSes (1.5, 1.6, 2.0, Sense, TouchFLO etc) which means multiple versions of the same app are required to get the whole Android market. This is bad for consumers because their options are now severely limited — unless they are savvy enough to upgrade their ROM or until they buy the latest and greatest handset.

The problem with Android is the problem with Windows. It’s not just an Android app (or a Windows App) like it’s just an iPhone/iPod Touch app (or a Mac App.) This app is an Android 2.0 (Windows XP) app and therefore will not run on a Android 1.5 (Windows 95) device. It’s developer orientated (version numbers) instead of consumer orientated (platform.) Most people know they have a Mac, or a Windows machine. They know they have an iPhone, or a Blackberry. They know they have a Magic but probably don’t know it’s Android 1.6. They know they have a Nokia, not an S60 device. The problem with Android is that it’s not consumer-centric in the way the Google Chrome is. Users don’t care about version numbers, which is why Chrome keeps you up to date and which is why the iPhone keeps you up-to-date.

I’m not an iPhone, Android or WinMo developer. I’m not a Windows, Mac or Linux developer. I’m just a consumer, and this has been my experience with the iPhone, iPhone 3GS, HTC Magic, with Mac OS X Leopard — Snow Leopard, Windows 95—7, and a myriad number of Linux distros that didn’t stay installed very long.

My dad, who purchased the HTC Magic, seems to think that it will get better as time goes on. I hope so but with the introduction of hundreds of new devices in 2010 — some without QWERTY keyboards, some without touch-screens and some not even mobile phones — I have a hard time believing that it will.

Android’s accessibility and interoperability will turn it into the Windows of the mobile world. Popular but sub-par.

It hasn’t been long since I vented my frustration at Vodafone’s disdain of their customers. Now we are back with another installment. Since my last rant Telecom has upped the anti and are now offering (for a limited time) unlimited text messages to any network for just $12 a month.

Texting on Telecom’s XT network is now virtually free (doing the maths, $12/∞ = 0.) Of course it’s not that simple, as “Fair use policy applies,” but it’s fair to say this is the best text bundle NZ has ever seen.

So, what do Vodafone offer? Yet another kick in the groin for their customers. We get TXT4000, an amazing deal for consumers that also only costs $12 and let’s Vodafone customers send 4000 texts to their friends (that’s $800 worth of texts!) Unfortunately this deal is only for Vodafone—Vodafone texts so in actual fact it’s only $20 worth of texts and not much more useful than TXT2000 because you still can’t text your Telecom friends without paying a hefty off-network tax. 4000/12 = 0.3c per text to Vodafone vs 20c to Telecom. That’s a hefty 19.7c tax! On Vodafone you pay 666% more to text Telecom than Vodafone.

I think that the Satan Tax off-network charges that Vodafone forces their customers to pay to text their friends who are now clearly on a superior network is just diabolical! Vodafone, you hate your customers and they are starting to hate you — which is why you feel the need to lock them into your network with anti-consumer tactics.

I am still a customer of Vodafone, but only because I can’t move to Telecom. My friends are all on Vodafone and they will stop texting me if I move to Telecom (thanks to off-network charges) which makes my phone pretty much useless. They can’t just switch to Telecom either because all their friends are also on Vodafone and they like using their phone to have two-way conversations with their other friends and not just me. We are all stuck.

2Degrees doesn’t discriminate against networks. Telecom doesn’t discriminate against networks. Vodafone is the only player who still won’t play nice, and it just shows that they hate their customers; you and me.

(These are the impressions I get from Vodafone’s behaviour and not something Vodafone actually said.)

Vodafone, do you have anything to say for yourself?

I’ve often heard Orcon referred to as NZ’s Best Internet Service Provider, and they’ve even been named as NZ’s fastest Internet Service Provider. In fact, I often only hear good things about the local ISP, Orcon.

One thing that scares me about Orcon though is their O-Zone. A list of websites that you can access for free; traffic from these websites do not count towards your monthly cap. This worry of mine escalated when I read about their Summer of Youtube promotion. All traffic on the Orcon network to and from Youtube is free until the end of January 2010 (Terms and Conditions apply.)

The slippery slope I refer to leads to what I believe is the death of the internet, the end of net neutrality. When your ISP controls (or has a high influence) about what you access on the internet by charging you more for certain content.

Currently Orcon customers are encouraged to visit TVNZ instead of TV3, George FM instead of TheEdge, ZM, More FM or MaiFM, Biggie instead of the Mukuna Gig Guide and now, Youtube instead of Vimeo.

I am not okay with an internet where I can’t choose what content I want to watch, isn’t that the only good thing about the internet is that it is a level playing field? Everyone has equal chance to make it big because we don’t rely on the Big Guys to pick and choose what content we can consume? In a world without Net Neutrality we have the ISPs deciding what we can and can’t consume.

The O-Zone is about as nice as Vodafone’s On-network promotions and pricing. It’s really only nice when you agree with Orcon’s choice of “good content.”

Long live Net Neutrality, long live the internet.

More than a year ago I designed what has become the look and feel of this very website. It didn’t look exactly the same, I was planning to build it on Expression Engine and wanted to highlight portfolio items (and especially artwork for sale) on the right. A few days ago I decided to build the website on Tumblr instead and so I started adding the Tumblr code to the HTML5/CSS3 templates I had created a few months ago from my designs in Illustrator.

HTML5/CSS3

When I say HTML5/CSS3 I am referring less to specific technologies and more to contemporary technologies. Yes, HTML5, yes CSS2.1 and yes some CSS3.

I made the choice to develop this website for my main browser of use first: Safari on Mac — so if you want the best experience then view it from the best browser. It then degrades somewhat gracefully in all modern browsers and thanks to Modernizr also Internet Explorer.

I made use of @font-face which seems to only really work properly in Safari on Mac. Despite following instructions from Mozilla on how to implement it. If you can see what I’m doing wrong, please let me know.

You’ll see some CSS3 transitions sparkled throughout. Not that exciting.

I have to say, overall, HTML5 and CSS3 is just so much nicer to work in, I just wish everyone would catch up!

Tumblr

Coding for Tumblr, hmm. Interesting. I do believe the platform is good which is why I chose to develop for it, and mostly everything is nice and simple but there are some things missing in my opinion.

• Support for {!block:Title} syntax so that I can display content when there isn’t a title — say, my avatar from Twitter because it would probably be a tweet. However not just on {block:Title} but all “if this exists” type tags.
• Support for automatic tagging of imported feeds. I’d like to be able to tag my posts from Twitter as “tweets” so that I can filter my content with /tagged/tweet/chrono or /tagged/photo/chrono. This isn’t possible yet.
• It would be nice to filter by content type: /type/text/ or /type/audio/. This should work with other filtering methods like: /type/text/tagged/holiday. However automatic tagging could make this a moot point. Possibly /tagged/tweet+holiday/
• Finally, proper support for Twitter, Facebook etc. I’d like to be able to access the Permalink of my tweet! I’d like to be able to have my tags from Twitter (hashtags) and Flickr to transfer over here. I’d like photos from Flickr to automatically form photosets if they’ve been uploaded within a short period of one another. I’d like Tumblr to be smart with these popular services!

That’s about it. Tumblr, please get smarter! Especially with feed importing.

I did manage to get around the lack of {!block:Title} issue using HTML commenting.

Anyway, we’ll see how this goes.