After Google bought YouTube, did anyone else think, “Okay, yeah, I can upload content to YouTube, and now I don’t have to worry about it going out of business some day”?
Anyone?
Archive for the 'Internet' Category
This is my first fall with the new camera and the pictures are really turning out great. I uploaded a bunch today. Check them out on my Flickr page.
Windows Vista comes out in January, but there are currently three Microsoft applications (that I know of) that boast the Vista look.
These are: Windows Live Messenger, Windows Media Player 11, and of course, Internet Explorer 7.
Immediately, I find it strange that of the three, IE7’s interface is the least Vista-fied. Media Player 11 looks exactly how I expect it to look in Windows Vista. Messenger is a little tougher, because although its appearance falls between those the XP versions of MP11 and IE7, I can’t tell if it will look any different in Vista. I can’t tell if its interface has stayed a bit more traditional because it’s generally a small window or because it’s the XP version.
Why would Microsoft hold back the visual progression of its most ubiquitous application? My first thought was that the age of the average IE user might be a bit higher than the age of the average Media Player user or Messenger User. By leaving the traditional title bar and corner buttons (minimize, maximize/restore, close) the same as those found in most XP applications, Microsoft may be trying to minimize intimidation experienced by older users — users who are already intimidated enough by computers. (As an example, I can imagine my dad clicking on a link that opens in a spawned instance of Media Player 11, then saying, “What the hell is this?”) Younger users — teenagers and twentysomethings — might be more appreciative of the glossy new MP and Messenger windows.
However, this morning I used Google to look for the release date of Office 2007 (Is anyone else excited about Excel 12?) and ran across this article on Ars Technica. Author Peter Pollack speculates as to how Microsoft chose Office 2007’s ship date. One sentence from his article bears repeating here:
Sending Office into the world early also runs the risk that some users may install it, discover it works well enough on XP, and hold off on the operating system upgrade.
Might the same logic apply to Internet Explorer? On my computer, the most commonly used application is my web browser (which is Firefox 2). I’d bet it’s also the web browser on most people’s computers, and the numbers tell us that most people’s web browser is still Internet Explorer. If all those people get the Vista visual upgrade on the application they use more than any other — for free — might they be less inclined to run out and buy a new operating system? It’s food for thought.
As a side note, I’ve barely used any of these three applications since Microsoft most recently updated them. Of the three, I use Media Player the most, but since I got my (second) iPod, I’ve been using iTunes a lot. I’m not in love with iTunes, but I’ve been listening to podcasts more lately and as far as I can tell iTunes is the best end-to-end solution for finding and subscribing to podcasts and syncing (which is easier than dragging) them to my iPod. In order to make sure that my iPod is as up-to-date as possible, I make sure that my iTunes is as up-to-date as possible — by leaving it running all the time.
Lately I’ve noticed that in Gmail’s input fields (i.e., when you’re composing a new email or talking to someone in chat), a right click brings up the option to Paste. Previously, this was impossible. I wrote a brief but astutely titled post about just this subject in August.
So why the sudden change? Did Google finally crumble under the crushing weight of reason, usability, and tradition to put the second half of the “one really just isn’t the same without the other” copy-and-paste combo into their otherwise gleaming interface? Or is it just the browsers? Paste is there in both Firefox 2 and IE7. I wouldn’t hold it past Microsoft to “improve” the interface of someone else’s website. (Yes, I put the work improve in quotes to make a small point — but paste functionality is an improvement.) But Mozilla? Mozilla wouldn’t do that, would they? Well, I guess they did put in that whole immensely useful spell check feature — a feature that shows up in the exact same text fields in which I now have the option to paste using only the mouse (and every other text field I encounter on the Internet).
(This feels like a good time to bring this up: Is Mozilla stepping on Google’s toes with the spell check? Google’s toolbar offered the exact same feature with nearly identical visual cues (which are in turn ripped off from Microsoft Word). Is Mozilla stepping on Google’s toes with the “right click on highlighted text to search for it in a new tab” feature? Again, the browser implements functionality identical to that which the toolbar already offered. I’m five second from uninstalling Google Toolbar. The one feature I don’t wish to part with is its AutoFill feature. How long until FireFox offers an identical tool?
And as long as I’m off subject, it’d be great if the built in search box (prominent in both Firefox forever and now IE7, too) opened a new tab automatically. The Google Toolbar gives me a checkbox for that, but I want to get rid of it.)
So it’s possible that the current generation of browsers are correcting deficiencies in Google’s services. If this is the case, perhaps it will wake Google up to make more advances in its products and, oh, I don’t know — get something out of beta? And I’m not talking about Desktop, which I uninstalled months ago.
Firefox 2 is gold. You can read about it and download it here.
I’ve been using it for about a month in the form of betas and release candidates, all via Firefox Portable. Firefox Portable is not official, and it’s designed to be run from removable media like a USB flash drive. It doesn’t leave any trace of itself on the host computer, the point of which is to maintain the user’s privacy. I think it’s a great safeguard against the potential dangers of beta software.
I find it very interesting that Internet Explorer 7 and Firefox 2 came out of beta within a week of each other, even if it is a coincidence. It’s reminiscent of the browser wars of the late 1990s, which Netscape lost. Depending on who you ask, this is now the “second browser war.”
Frankly I like the look of the buttons in IE7 better than those in Firefox 2. But Firefox is skinnable, and I won’t be at all surprised to see an IE7 skin show up for it. It’s interesting how much effort Microsoft has put into getting the interface out of the user’s way; In full screen mode, the interface hides above the top of the screen. (Curiously, the status bar remains at the bottom, but it can be toggled normally.) I actually think that the buttons are a little scrunched in IE7. I’d like a little more room between the forward and backward buttons, and I’d like them just a little bit farther from the top left corner.
I like how IE7 combines the Go and Reload buttons. Once a page is loaded, the Go button becomes the Reload button. At times while using several browsers I have reach a point where both buttons seemed like they would get me what I wanted, but I felt slightly uneasy as I was unable to determine a functional difference between the two. I hope that Microsoft has move the functionality around correctly (although my uneasiness may have been completely unwarranted), but they have certainly done away with the ambiguity. I’ll take that.
Both browsers should take a lesson from the Google Toolbar — it allows search results to appear in a new tab. Neither Firefox 2’s nor IE7’s built in search bar open results in a new tab, nor do they offer the user the option of that behavior. Nine times out of ten when I perform a search on Google it’s because I want to know more about the subject of the page I’m currently reading. I don’t want to stop reading it. I shouldn’t have to launch a new tab, navigate to it, and then perform my “convenient and built in search.” This should be one step. This single feature is the only thing keeping the Google Toolbar installed on (both) my browsers.
If this is a second browser war, I don’t see any party getting wiped off the face of the earth the way Netscape was. The market isn’t black and white any more — it’s fragmented. Mac OS has Safari. Windows has IE. The tech-minded have adopted Firefox, but it’s reaching beyond them. Then you’ve got Opera, Konqueror, Camino … There are options. The market (if you can call it that) has matured a lot in the last ten years.
Additionally, you don’t see companies like Virgin Records slapping giant “Only compatible with Internet Explorer” messages at the bottom of their homepages anymore. Ten years ago, I’d guess that big companies looked at the Internet and still couldn’t see it for more than an alternative to TV. Perhaps they thought of IE3 and Netscape Navigator like television networks — you’ve gotta pick one and only one. Now, I think the mindset is inclusion rather than exclusion. Companies want their content to reach as many eyes as possible, and that means offering compatibility with as many browsers as possible. That leads to compatibility. That leads to standards.
Another reason I don’t see this as much of a war is because different browsers aren’t pitching new, incompatible rendering technologies. Browsers want to be able to render the most popular websites. They must — or users will abandon them. Assuming all browsers render pages relatively accurately, all that’s left to draw users into their camp are speed and interface. I personally switched to the Mozilla browser because it offered tabs. I hated dealing with all my IE6 windows on the Windows XP taskbar. Tabs were a joy, and still are. If not for tabs, I don’t think IE7 would exist today. Firefox had tabs to get users to seriously consider the switch. It had speed to keep them. If Firefox had loaded pages slower than IE, many users would have gotten frustrated and stayed with IE.
I have no plans to stop using Firefox. Version 2 is better than version 1. It appears (to me) that it loads pages more quickly than IE7. IE7 won’t let me see my Gmail (which I load up in https) until I hit OK on the “secure and unsecure items” dialog box. That is enough to keep me from switching. It’s enough to keep me from even considering the switch.
IE’s come a long way with its interface. A long way. The fact that there is a team at Microsoft means that incremental features will roll out. Firefox will need more innovations than it’s had in two years. Competition will benefit the consumer.
Anyway, if you haven’t downloaded IE7, download it and install it (assuming you’re on Windows). If you haven’t downloaded Firefox, go download version 2 and install it. Then make it your default browser.
Anyone else’s Gmail Talk not loading in IE7?
WordPress theme K2 recently updated with version 0.9.1. I downloaded it. I installed it. I’m unhappy with it.
My number one gripe? The fonts changed from Beta Two to 0.9. Why? It’s an arbitrary change. I had been using Beta Two for months and now I’m supposed to deal with tweaky bulls***? This is the sort of thing I deal with when I’m evaluating a potential theme, not when I’m applying an incremental update.
My number two gripe? Although there is an extrememly useful tool — new in 0.9 — that allows me to change my header image without using an FTP client, there is no toggle to turn off the header text. This sounds to me like it should be simpler to implement than an image uploader, parser, selecter, and hell — randomizer! This means that if people want to disable the header text, we’ve got to edit CSS. Not unheard of, but again — this is the sort of thing I look at when I’m evaluating a theme, not when I’m applying an update.
The tipping point? K2’s forum is down, and although the post that tells me this says the problem “might take up to a day or two,” that very post is over a week old, and the forums still aren’t back up. So I can’t read the old forum post that told me how to eliminate the header text.
As a result of these gripes, I have rolled my site back to K2 Beta Two.
PS — As of 0.9, there are spelling errors in the K2 admin interface. This is the sort of thing that should lessen as a product nears final release — not increase. Boo K2, boo.
I upped for a Flickr Pro account. There is a direct correlation between this and the fact that I recently purchased a new camera. I’ve uploaded several sets and I’m sure I’ll upload more soon. Here’s the link.
Earlier this week I placed an order on a website for the Sony Cyber-shot® DSC-H2 Digital Camera. I initially placed my order with Royal Camera, a business that has an online store through store.yahoo.com. I chose Royal Camera because the price this business offered on the DSC-H2 was roughly one hundred dollars less than what most other online retailers offered.
After placing the order, I received no confirmation email and began to feel nervous. However, the final screen that loaded into my web browser after I entered all of my personal information included a phone number in case I wanted to track my order. I called it the next day and discovered a few things:
- Royal Camera must have no more than two customer service reps, because I waited on hold for a while
- Royal Camera really wants me to buy a memory stick, or batteries, or a case
- The camera I ordered will take 6 to 8 weeks to ship — because
- It’s being shipped from Japan — because
- It’s the international version — oh, and
- The international version does not come with cables, batteries, or a charger — so
- To use the camera, I’m going to need batteries, cables, a memory stick, and what do I mean I don’t want a case?
- Yes, Royal Camera offers the camera with the standard USB cable, batteries, and charger included, but that will be another $180, which means this is no longer a bargain
I cancelled my order with Royal Camera. Before I finalized my order, Royal Camera’s website told me that the camera was in stock and that it would ship in 1-2 days. Remember: Don’t ever buy anything from Royal Camera’s website. They are part of the store.yahoo.com system. Some merchants on store.yahoo.com might be honorable. Royal Camera is not honorable. Avoid it.
Anyway, to get off of Royal Poopy, I’m looking forward to the new camera. It’s six megapixels (yes, I could have had more megapixels for another hundred bucks), has a 12x optical zoom, and will not slip easily into a jeans pocket. But I don’t really want a camera that will fit easily into a pocket. I want a camera that will let me zoom in on Michael Vick or Jeff Francouer or a skittish deer. I believe a 12x zoom will allow me to do that.
Also, this may force me to pull a Lewis and get a Flickr Pro account.
Why is it that when I right click in Gmail, there’s no option for Paste?
