I don't like it. Apparently, thousands are with me on this.
Google, at any given moment runs hundreds of experiments around the world. They say the home page fade-in will be permanent.
Thousands of searchers including myself wonder why. Why do we need this? Why do Google think we need this? Even Google's own research shows it slows down reaction time. Google's explanation here. To their claim, it makes the search box more prominent. My god, how prominent do they want it? Not too long ago they added the huge, giant sized search box. And yet still they're worried people are not going to find the search box fast enough. Were their focus group alive?
I believe technology should enrich our lives, make our everyday a bit more interesting. It should garnish the life we already have as humans in a society and not something that enslaves us in our everyday lives.
But look what's happening around you. Many so called 'social' media is actually making people anti-social. The addiction toward technology and social media is so severe that people rarely talk or mingle in person.
Friends who used to talk to each other now check their emails or play games on phones while waiting for their food in a restaurant. Parents and children alike logon to their computer as soon as they come home right up to the point where they doze off. Some can't bear the thought of missing out on upto-the-second Twitter update on Ashton Kutcher's preference on hairspray.
The level of addiction is serious. Do people talk to each other anymore? What is the value of having 600 friends on Facebook if you are sitting frozen by the computer screen or staring at your little phone on weekends? We may think we're doing a lot by making friends or creating network online but we're actually achieving nothing if our 'real' life becomes lifeless. I'm not saying we do not need technology or social media. No, far from it. We do need technology and online community. Many peoples' livelihood including mine depend on the existence and adaptation of technology. But like any other good things in life, technology too, should be integrated into our lives in moderation.
I think designers and developers alike are realizing using HTML TABLE for "some" layout is a smart thing to do after all. Some wise usage of TABLE based layout is popping up everywhere recently including Google Apps. Below is a Firebug screen capture of parts of Google Calendar where it uses TABLE for layout.
I totally agree. The "no TABLE no matter what the cost" approach is a silly fad and a movement advocated by early css developers who were overly enthusiastic with their fascination with the new-found technique. I see where they're coming from , too. If you were coming from the early days of web development with sketchy browser css support, using tables to workaround layout issues can get pretty messy and a maintenance nightmare. So a proper browser support of CSS was indeed a breath of fresh air and freedom. But shunning TABLE no matter what the cost subjects yourself to complicated rows of DIVs and floats which in essence works against the simple and maintainable approach. Using TABLE for layout makes sense if used properly. Although not captured in the example, content inside the table is organized nicely using <div>and lists <li>. Organizing content this way yields to much more predictable behavior across platform and browsers.
I would not recommend this TABLE + CSS hybrid method for blogs or any sites that are at the mercy of search engines or readers. But for applications or widgets it makes perfect sense and will make your life as a UI designer/developer a whole lot easier. As with any tool, you just have to be smart about when, where and how much to use.
Yes, I've waited long enough. It's about time I got a DSLR. I have ran out of excuses not to get one. I can no longer justify (read afford) using film or shoot pocket cam when a job at hand demands more creativity. While full-frame DSLRs still cost way more than what I want to spend on a camera (not that anything I do would require such a thing), most decent pro-consumer DSLRs' prices have come down to a reasonable level. Objectively speaking, even the entry level DSLRs on the market today are exceptional value considering what they're capable of.
To make the long story very short, it came down to Canon 50D and Nikon D90. The price point and the capabilities of these two were very similar.
I have had 35mm film SLRs from all sorts of brands including Pentax, Olympus, and Canon but I have never owned a Nikon before. I've always had a soft spot for Nikons but have never got around to having one. And since I'm not a professional photographer by trade whose collection of expensive lenses dictate brand loyalty, I decided to go with the Nikon. But the decision wasn't totally on a whim. The fact that the Nikon D90 has larger sensor without the extraneous pixel count was a big plus for me since I enjoy low-light and night shooting. Although the Canon 50d felt better in the hands and I really liked the position of the shutter release button. The Canon 50d also has higher maximum shutter speed. But since I don't shoot sports or chase around cheetahs all day, the pro-level shutter speed was of little use for me.
In fact, the Nikon had little details that I thought would be more useful to me. The menu system and the access to settings on the Nikon was much quicker to manipulate which is a big plus in situations where you just don't have enough time to fiddle with menus. So far I am very satisfied with my decision. I need now, a good tripod and a cool looking backpack.
I had quite a few people ask me how they can hide a layer in Flash without actually deleting that layer. The little "X" below the eye icon hides a layer from view while you're working on a file but doesn't hide that layer from a published movie. What if you don't want certain layers to be published in a movie but yet do not want to delete them in case you want it back? Many beginners simply delete the layer, test movie, and then undo the deletion if they want the layer back. While this works, it's not very elegant nor efficient especially when you're dealing with multiple layers. Not to mention relying on undo is very risky in Flash.
This is where the "Guide" layer comes in. The Guide feature is originally intended to hold a path on which an object should move. Since you wouldn't want the guide to show in a movie, Flash hides any layer designated as a guide. Since you can designate any layer as a Guide layer, this in turn works perfectly in case you want to hide a layer from a published movie temporarily. Just turn the guide on to hide and turn it back off if you want to include it back in the movie! Simple and elegant.
No one is an island. All graphic/web designers need to be inspired from other designers every now and then. Here is a nice collection of newish design trends that some might call 'web 2.0' like look and feel.
She uses sand on a lightbox. Not only she draws but the drawings transition into sequence of scenes which tell a story which in itself is in sync with the music throughout the entire thing. Absolutely amazing!
I'm not in love with Twitter myself yet but I do believe it can turn out to be a useful medium depending on how you choose to use it. Some anti Twitter like this one, at first glance, seem to have a point but you quickly realize the person really doesn't know how to use Twitter - at least not in a way that would've been beneficial.
Many people are quick to dismiss Twitter as total waste of time (I was one of them). But anything can be a waste of time if used without any discretion or purpose. Watching television, reading magazines, reading books or going to movies can all be a waste of time if we're not being selective. If you're tired of seeing tweets about someone's eating habits, you can choose not to follow them just like you would change the channel or turn off your TV set if you're not interested. You don't have to sit there and absorb all the random tweets. Of course, if you are mindlessly following bunch of people you don't know, you are going to see lots of porn links, scams, and ads. But that's the consequence of your actions not the design fault of Twitter.
I don't follow too many people but I do find helpful articles and links related to my craft through those few that I do follow. Just be smart about what information you'd like to gain through the medium. Although, I'm not too crazy about the up-to-the-minute updates and information. As far as I'm concerned, nothing is that urgent. If something is that urgent, there are more effective communication mediums out there for urgent stuff. For any other casual information exchange, Twitter does the job.
I'd like to single out yet another skill-set a web designer must be aware of. It's Wordpress. The enormous popularity of the Wordpress platform along with blogging and simple content management has transformed the way we build lightweight websites. It's unlikely that a large scale site or application would be built entirely of Wordpress but we see it being used in blog sections of popular websites such as The New York Times.
WordPress has become so popular, that in some circles, a web designer is known as someone who customizes and designs for WordPress. Contrary to popular belief, however, working with Wordpress does not free web designers from the need to learn and gain knowledge of other existing web technologies. Wordpress is like a well prepared blank canvass that a designer or a developer must enhance upon. Wordpress only frees us from reinventing the wheel, but as far as improving and spicing up the wheel, we can all get creative and sky is the limit.
