Blog

A collection of links, articles and stories.

Like a Whisper

Public broadcasting is a balance. It’s a balance between not getting your message across to an audience at all and spamming your message so loudly that its demand for attention becomes deafening and is ignored altogether.

I feel I haven't been broadcasting Chasing Perfection articles optimally. I’m making some changes to how I broadcast articles today, and I think you’ll like them. When I share my writing, I don’t want to yell out like an entitled child; I want to unveil my very own work of art.

The more you shout, the fewer listen.

A new entry is added to Chasing Perfection about once a day. Sometimes more, sometimes less. Due to this infrequent-esque posting schedule (and the relative timelessness of articles), I often feel I should share new entries to twitter more than once — after all, twitter is where most of my audience resides (and not everyone reads every tweet in their timeline). Mentioning an article more than once would increase the chances of each follower seeing and enjoying the articles.

Unfortunately, the caveat here is that some people do read every tweet. For those people, seeing the same article mentioned by the same individual multiple times would surely become tiresome very quickly. I don’t want to annoy or spam my followers, so this seems far from ideal.

There is a Chasing Perfection twitter account which tweets a link to every new entry, and there’s my personal twitter account, which tweets on no particular schedule.

My new strategy for sharing articles is to make further use of retweets: my personal twitter account will share tweets from the CP account. I will not abide by a strict policy; not all will be shared, but most certainly will. My judgement will come into play here. The main reason for this is that the retweets will only be seen by those who do not already follow the CP account. For someone who does follow the CP account and my personal account, there will be no repeated tweets.

The second prong of this new approach is creating a tweet-sized description of each article. That description, along with a link to the article in question, will be tweeted from my personal account. These “tease-tweets” will act as a blurb; individually crafted to provide new value even to those who have read the article already.

The problem with retweets is that they’re endorsements of something else, rather than statements by the retweeter. A viewer of a retweet sees the username and avatar of the retweetee, with only a small mention of the retweeter. Interestingly, this is similar to how twitter displays adverts.

I feel it is important to tweet both from my own account — a “tease-tweet”, if you will — and to retweet the CP account. The personal tweet and the retweet contain different content. The personal tweet has my avatar next to it and doesn’t look at all like an advert. This makes the link appear more trustworthy and of higher quality. The CP retweet will appear to be more “adverty”, but is also a statement from me: “If you like my writing, why not follow the CP twitter account?”

Getting a broadcasting balance just right is hard. These changes should hopefully improve my own balance without annoying followers, repeatedly saying the same thing, or shouting.

I’ll whisper more and shout less.

The Worrying Future of Android

As ever, some great analysis of data by Horace:

Samsung’s success is dependent on having ridden on the back of Android. [...] Meanwhile, indications are that “mobile” is causing a contraction in Google’s margins.

I think the story here isn't that Samsung is making more money from Android than Google is, but instead that as Google enters the mobile space further, their margins decrease. This seems counterintuitive and can't be a good sign for the company.

We know that Google makes significantly more money from iOS users than from Android users. That fact, coupled with this new revelation, seems to indicate an unpredictable and worrying future for the platform.

As Horace concludes:

If nothing else, Android has created a very interesting industry.

Very interesting indeed.

Value The Moment

Jordan Koschei writes a great piece for The Industry, which, after reading, reminded me to spend more time enjoying the moment, and less time detailing it:

In our rush to document our lives we’ve stopped living them. By placing a lens between ourselves and our experiences, we make ourselves mere observers. We go through the motions of doing interesting things, all the while considering our experiences as a meta-narrative. Instead of focusing on the experience, we’re focusing on what other people will think of us having had the experience. We’ve relegated ourselves to cameraman status in our own movies.

This isn't to say that documenting one's life isn't a good thing — I keep a diary of sorts (and am very glad I do) — but it's easy to spend the entirety of a rock concert taking pictures and recording video, only to realise later that one's limited attention had been devoted to taking pictures, rather than enjoying the concert.

I would rather devote my full attention to the moment, then write my own description of the day in a diary. Attempting to take pictures of or live-tweet something I may later wish I'd paid more attention to is only setting myself up for regret.

I value my memories and experiences more highly than the images I capture with my iPhone.

Was Steven Sinofsky Compromising Microsoft?

MG Siegler writes some smart things about Steven Sinofsky's departure from Microsoft:

Sinofsky was the driving force behind the “no compromise” approach to Windows 8. I believe that approach is at the heart of the ultimate problem with the OS. As two separate halves, Windows 8 and Metro seem fine. As a whole, the OS seems like a schizophrenic mess. Microsoft should have copied the Apple approach with OS X/iOS, keeping them separate and slowly merging them over time by taking the best of both.

If Microsoft now starts to move Windows into a more iOS/OS X-esque, touch/keyboard and mouse optimised route, I think my biggest concerns with the software will disappear. I firmly believe that the “no compromise” approach to Windows 8 harmed the software significantly. Trying to glue together software designed to be interacted with a keyboard and mouse to software designed for touch, and attempting to make both work was a huge mistake.

If Sinofsky was the man responsible for this “no compromise” approach to Windows 8, perhaps his departure will result in more compromises and therefore better design. This may give Microsoft a chance to make headway in the tablet space.

I believe Microsoft could ship a Metro-only version of the Surface, without Office (or a desktop) and optimise it for touch. This is what they should have done all along with the Surface for Windows RT. The Surface Pro should be the only version with a desktop-mode — and only for running legacy applications. Microsoft should have created Office for Metro.

Microsoft shipping a real alternative to the iPad would be good for everyone: a monopoly is rarely a good thing, and Apple operates well under pressure from competitors.

Nvidia CEO: "The PC Market is Being Eaten by Tablets"

Impressive numbers reported by Nvidia: a third of its entire business is now non-PC and its tablet shipments have doubled from just a year ago. The post-PC era seems to be benefiting Nvidia a lot; their third quarter revenue reached the highest it's ever been at $1.2 billion.

Nvidia's CEO says the total market for PCs is "being eaten by tablets". Why? He explains:

"The reason for that is because a great tablet is surely better than a cheap PC."

A great tablet is cheaper than a great PC.

Obsolete

Steve Jobs, 2007:

There is always change and improvement, and there is always someone who bought a product before a particular cutoff date and misses the new price or the new operating system or the new whatever. This is life in the technology lane. If you always wait for the next price cut or to buy the new improved model, you'll never buy any technology product because there is always something better and less expensive on the horizon. The good news is that if you buy products from companies that support them well, like Apple tries to do, you will receive years of useful and satisfying service from them even as newer models are introduced.

It's easy to be annoyed when a newly released piece of software doesn't work on your not-yet-old device. I'm looking at you, iPad 1 owners.

Unfortunately, there's normally a reason for it.

As Marco points out, when the original iPad shipped in early 2010, it ran iOS 3.2 and supported very few background tasks. For this reason, the compromise of including just 256MB of system memory seemed fair at the time. However as iOS matured, the need for background tasks such as iCloud and third-party music apps has demanded more memory. Now the lack of RAM seems like an oversight; a poor design choice. "Why can't my iPad run iOS 6? Apple is trying to make me upgrade to a new iPad just to give them more money!"

It's important for gadget buyers to remember that the first generation of a new product is likely to have more compromises than later generations. With any version 1.0, creators put the fruit of their labours out into the world and watch everyone discover, explore and criticise the hard work that went into them. Whilst any company should always be learning from their existing products, I imagine the releases which teach creators the most are the 1.0s. These releases give the most insight into how the product is used, what works well and what needs to be improved.

A good test for this theory will be to see which changes are made when the iPad mini is updated for the first time. Will the screen be the big compromise of the first generation? Will it be the CPU? Something else?

It's important to note that buying products based on what they can do today is important. Don't assume your device will be updated for years to come. Don't buy a device because you expect an important feature to be coming in a future update: wait until the feature you need is available or find something else. This will lead you to be more content with the products you have. You'll worry less about devices you own being obsolete and focus more on enjoying what you own.

The technology world is always changing. Technology is like a piece of music; you enjoy it for the journey itself, not reaching the end.

Windows Phone 8 and apps

Tom Warren writes a good summary of the recent Microsoft Build event in Seattle. The following sentence, where he compares the improvements of Windows Phone 8 to Windows Phone 7 is worth noting:

Microsoft launched Windows Phone [7] with a marketing effort designed to minimize the importance of apps — with ads about smartphone addicts — but it now finds itself reversing on that message and focusing on apps with Windows Phone 8.

It seems Microsoft originally bet against apps with Windows Phone1. Now they've reversed on their position. Whilst it's good that their position has switched, I can't help but ask why the software giant didn't realise the importance of apps earlier.


1: Either that, or they majorly downplayed the importance of apps due to the lack available for their new platform.

Microsoft’s Struggle: No compromises equals bad design

In my most recent article for The Industry, I write about why I think Microsoft made some poor design choices with Windows RT on the new Surface:

So, is the Microsoft Surface for Windows RT a “no compromises” OS? In some ways, yes. But this brings with it even more problems than a device which has a healthy dose of compromises.

I go on to explain how I think the device could be improved. I'm quite proud of this piece.

Microsoft's Chief Patent Counsel Talks a Lot, Says Very Little

Marco will love this:

What we strive to do is integrate as well as we can with all the different business divisions to really understand where the technology investments are being made, where the innovation is occurring, what the priorities are for the future, and put a patent strategy in place that is aligned with and supports the business.

I read that entire sentence and didn't learn anything. I nearly dozed off a couple of lines in.

Why is it so difficult for companies to communicate clearly?

The Best

Dustin Curtis is a great writer:

“The best” isn’t necessarily a product or thing. It’s the reward for winning the battle fought between patience, obsession, and desire.

This is something that means a lot to me. Dustin has recently been on a personal quest for perfection. This is his story.