Vincent Gable’s Blog

October 6, 2009

‘Yum!’

Filed under: Design,iPhone,MacOSX,Programming | , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on October 6, 2009

I give Microsoft’s current Mac software some shit, but I think it’s deserved. So it’s only fair I mention their glory days.

From “Classic” Mac OS 8.1 in 1998 through Mac OS X 10.2 Microsoft’s Internet Explorer (for Mac) was the default web browser Apple chose for Mac OS. The very fist iMac? It came with IE:mac, just like the first version of Mac OS X.

And IE:mac wasn’t so bad, for it’s era. (It was the first browser to have color correcting PNGs, by the way!) There was one really neat feature that I think is worth calling out: it would match your iMac’s color, automagically.

Technical Details That I Only Half Remember

If you have a better understanding of how this worked, please let me know! I couldn’t find any details online. Mostly, I’m writing down what I remember before I forget.

The poorly named Gestalt function lets you check information about the Mac OS runtime, like “what version of Mac OS is this?“. You pass it a FourCharCode, and replies with a 32-bit value or an error code — old stuff from the “Classic” Mac OS days.

There was an undocumented code, 'yum!' 1, that returned the color of an the iMac or iBook case. IE:mac would check this when it first started, and choose a color scheme to match the operator’s Mac. It was a seamless personal touch that really impressed me.

It’s the sort of thing I’d like to see more of on today’s multi-colored iPods and iPhones.

1It might have been 'Yum!', I don’t remember exactly, and Gestalt() returns gestaltUndefSelectorErr, -5551, for all of variations on my MacBook Pro under Snow Leopard.

June 4, 2009

MicroISV

Filed under: Programming | , , , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on June 4, 2009

The word microISV is all business, in all the wrong ways.

MicroISV stands for “Micro Independent Software Vendor”, which in plain english means a tiny software company, usually on the order of one or three people.

Probably the best reason to buy software from such a small shop is passion. People who build and sell their own software directly tend to care very deeply about it. Their program is their baby. Nobody in a microISV is just in it for the paycheck. No matter how cool a large corporation is, at the end of the day everyone has to compromise on their dream to work together on it. But a one man shop never has to compromise or design by committee.

“Micro Independent Software Vendor” doesn’t communicate this agile vision. It sounds like the same kind of turgid enterprise think that drove the world’s largest software company to rename Netbooks, “low-cost small notebook PCs”. (You just can’t make this stuff up!)

Three people are never going to out-Big-Business a Big Business. So it just doesn’t make sense to label what they do with a Big Business Word. (And by word, I mean several words, because that’s how Enterprise Speak works.)

The most popular synonym for microISV I see in the Mac software scene is indy developer. I think it’s a fine term — better than microISV by about a factor of IBM’s income. But there are many other excellent alternatives to “indie”, like boutique, nano, one-man, etc. The exact term isn’t important; and it need not be short. If someone wants to open their own “Hand Cyphered Soft-Wares Emporium“, then more power to them! What’s important is that their taxonomy reflect the culture of commitment that goes into their unique software.

EDITED TO ADD: Small Batch Business is another fantastic name.

April 1, 2009

Microsoft Excel Does Not Excel at Graphing

Filed under: Design,Quotes,Usability | , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on April 1, 2009

I gripe about Excel a lot, as we’re more or less forced to use it for data analysis in the intro labs (students who have taken the intro engineering course supposedly are taught how to work with Excel, and it’s kind of difficult to buy a computer without it these days, so it eliminates the “I couldn’t do anything with the data” excuse for not doing lab reports). This is a constant source of irritation, as the default settings are carefully chosen so as to make it difficult for students to do a good job of data presentation.

Now, you might be saying “Well, of course Excel isn’t appropriate for scientific data analysis. It’s not really for scientists, though.” Which is true, but here’s the thing: the things I’ve complained about here aren’t good for anything. The color schemes and axis settings lead to illegible plots no matter what sort of data you’re working with. And I’m completely at a loss as to the purpose of the “Line” plot, or making it difficult to find uncertainties in fitted quantitites.

Professor Chad Orzel, Why Does Excel Suck So Much?

There’s no question in my mind that a lot of serious analysis is done in(spite) Excel. I’ve worked with some very smart programmers, with PhDs in experimental science, who have “numerics” in their job description, and used Excel to make quick graphs.

The best solution I can recommend is reading The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. It’s probably the best guide to honestly presenting data graphically.

Unfortunately I don’t have a good recommendation for a better software program. The excellent redrawings at the chartjunk blog were done in Adobe Illustrator (more info in this comment). But Illustrator costs $599, and is a complex drawing program. Honestly the sticker price, and ease of use, have kept me from trying it.

What do you use to draw graphs?

February 9, 2009

No Ducking Way!

Filed under: Design,Quotes,Uncategorized | , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 9, 2009

I’ve finally found an example of, someone intentionally typing “ducking” on their iPhone,

Plotting routes to meetings based on who I’m currently ducking. It’s good for exercise. Also that time iPhone was correct- I meant ducking.

Obviously we can’t have a spellchecker suggesting profanity. But is it really so wrong to just leave it alone? Can we trust that if someone says something that strongly they really meant it?

Word 2008 seems to try, bless it’s heart. It won’t suggest or correct, “Mike Lee” (at least when it’s written as two words).

But it still can’t stand one of the heavy seven (original MP3). Word gives it the scarlet underline. That strikes me as odd. I wish I knew the story behind it. Is it actually a dangerously common typo? Is it statistically more taboo? Did someone just make a Puritan judgement call, and decide people wanted to be corrected for writing it? (UPDATE 2009-11-18: apparently it is the worst swear word in the World, at least according to that cute story.)

Ask yourself, are obscenity filters a Bad Idea, or an Incredibly Intercoursing Bad Idea?

Now Recognizing President Barrack Abeam

Filed under: Design,Programming,Usability | , , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on February 9, 2009

President “Barack Obama” is not recognized by my Mac’s spellchecker. Firefox, Microsoft Word1, Mac OS X — each of them has a built in spellchecker, and none of them know how to say our president’s name. Spell checker dictionaries need to be updated more frequently — to keep up with the emails we write.

Things have improved since 1995, but there’s still a long way to go.

There’s more to say about how to fix things, but someone has already said it. The future looks bright,

(Microsoft) now scans through trillions of words, including anonymized text from Hotmail messages, in the hunt for dictionary candidates. On top of this, they monitor words that people manually instruct Word to recognize. “It’s becoming rarer and rarer that anything that comes to us ad hoc isn’t already on our list” from Hotmail or user data, Calcagno says. According to a July 14, 2006, bug report, for example, the Natural Language Group harvested the following words that had appeared more than 10 times in Hotmail user dictionaries: Netflix, Radiohead, Lipitor, glucosamine, waitressing, taekwondo, and all-nighter.

I think the next step in spellchecking is to follow Mac OS X’s lead, and adopt a system-wide spellchecker. When there’s only one instance of a spellchecker running (not a separate one for every program that might work with text) we can make it much smarter, without requiring a supercomputer.


1


Microsoft added Barack and Obama to Office’s dictionary back in April 2007, but unfortunately, that change hasn’t yet made it to the Mac Ghetto, ahem, “Mac BU”. Or at least I haven’t seen it in Word yet.

December 20, 2008

“Most Windows Developers Couldn’t Care Less About Design”

Filed under: Design,Programming,Quotes | ,
― Vincent Gable on December 20, 2008

Judging by the applications I’ve used, most Windows developers couldn’t care less about design. That’s bad. What’s even worse is learning that same design carelessness has shipped in the box with every copy of Visual Studio since 2002.

See, even Jeff Atwood says it, and he’s no Mac fanboy.

October 11, 2008

Steve Ballmer Admits Microsoft Office For Mac Is Shitty

Filed under: MacOSX,Quotes | , ,
― Vincent Gable on October 11, 2008

Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer recently admitted Office 2008 for Mac is stunted

can you find the applications you want on the Mac? Well, you don’t really get full Microsoft Office (on the Mac).”

I doubt this surprises anyone, but boy would I be depressed if I worked in the Mac BU (Business Unit), and the CEO came out and poo-pooed my work. That’s not doing right by your people.

I’ve written before about how I dislike using Microsoft Office 2008 for Mac, and how its high sales figures are in spite of it’s quality, not because of it.

September 5, 2008

The ‘Apple Stands on 3rd Party Shoulders’ Theory

Filed under: Uncategorized | , , ,
― Vincent Gable on September 5, 2008

Do you know what the real difference is between a Mac and a PC?

It’s not just the OS. A platform always stands or falls on third-party development. The difference is that Mac software tends to be well designed, and Windows software tends to suck.

Mike Lee, being “an elitist Mac-fan wanker”. Some interesting comments so far.

Condescending Rich Guys

Filed under: Design,Quotes | ,
― Vincent Gable on September 5, 2008

Maria Russo, in the LA Times, totally nails what’s wrong with Microsoft’s first Seinfeld-fueled commercial

Let’s start with the premise of these two famous rich people out discount shoe shopping. Ha, ha! They don’t really have to shop at Payless like the half a million people who lost their jobs this year.

Gates and Seinfeld may both be schlumpy dressers, but their regular-guy qualities stop there. Neither is the Warren Buffett kind of rich, the frugal sort who knows the value of a dollar and doesn’t put himself above the working man (or so we believe about Buffett). Instead the ad seems to be somehow making light of bargain-shopping, as if it’s just a lark for these guys, or some kind of joke that we’re not quite in on.

July 10, 2008

Money and Sales are Not a Metric for Good

Filed under: Programming,Usability | , , , , ,
― Vincent Gable on July 10, 2008

Sergey Solyanik recently explained why he left Google for Microsoft.

The second reason I left Google was because I realized that I am not excited by the individual contributor role any more, and I don’t want to become a manager at Google.

And I don’t know enough about Google or Microsoft’s management culture to offer any insight on this point.

I can’t write code for the sake of the technology alone – I need to know that the code is useful for others, and the only way to measure the usefulness is by the amount of money that the people are willing to part with to have access to my work.

He goes on to say that Microsoft measures everything in money, but at Google there are “eye candy” projects that are free, so he does not feel successful making them.

Now I feel the same way about writing code for the sake of technology alone. It is ultimately unfulfilling. And I have great respect someone who knows what they want to do, and does it. But I strongly feel that sales and profit are not the right metrics to measure how useful something is. There are several reasons for this

Customers and users are not the same thing.

Maximizing profits is distinct from, and often antagonistic to, maximizing quality.

The marketplace is too chaotic and relative to measure quality.

Ironically Microsoft Office 2008 For Mac is the perfect example. It’s the best selling version of Office for the Mac ever. If sales are a metric, it should be the best version of office. But it’s not (v5.1 may have this honor, at least for Word). Why it sucks is it’s own series ; I won’t go there for now. There are two big reasons why Mac Office 2008 sold so well in spite of it’s poor quality.

Firstly, there are more Mac users now then at any point in history. And Mac market-share is still rising. When 2.5x as many Macs are being sold today as 2 years ago it would be very difficult not to sell more copies of a popular Mac software package!

Secondly, 3 years ago, Apple switched from PowerPC to x86 microprocessors. Non-x86-native versions of office run excruciatingly slow on x86 computers. Microsoft made a “business decision” to not support Mac Office customers by denying them an x86-native update for versions of Office prior to 2008. There was a two-year period when the only Macs Apple would sell you had x86 processors, and the only version of office you could buy was not x86 native. This really sucked for users. But it paid off for Microsoft. They saved money by not supporting customers (which means higher profit, which is the only metric of good software, right?). But more importantly, it crippled older versions of office, which forced people to upgrade. People who would normally say “Well, I paid $500 for my copy of Office, and it may be old, but it does what I need, so I’ll skip the ‘upgrade’ and stick with ‘ol reliable, thankyouverymuch!” now had a horrible reason to upgrade. It isn’t that Office 2008 is so much better then other versions of Office, it’s that older versions of Office stopped working!

Customers != Users

I am a Mac Office 2008 user, but not a customer. Personally I think it’s is a shitty product, and I hate using it. But my employer’s IT department bought it for me, since it’s the only way to get Entourage, the lame Outlook clone for the Mac. And Entourage is the only way to get notifications from the company’s Exchange server whenever I get an email or calendar update, so I have to use it every work day.

You can’t look at the sale of Mac Office that I use and say “Vincent thought it was worth $500”, because that’s not what happened! What happened was that “Some company that Vincent works for thought it was worth $500…. because it played nice with their email server“. I hardly enter into the fucking equation at all! It’s more about the email servers then me, and I have absolutely no input on how the email servers were set up 10 years before I was hired.

Chaotic Market

And about that $500 figure ($499.95 is the estimated retail price of “Office 2008 for Mac
Special Media Edition”, and $500 is a nice round number so I’m sticking with it). Pricing is a black art. (That article is 5000 words, but I do think it’s worth reading). The only Office 2008 product I use every day is Entourage. But you can’t buy just Entourage, you have to buy it as part of an “Office 2008” bundle. And Microsoft loves to segment it’s pricing

So it’s unclear what you are buying, why, or how much of the money you give Microsoft is because of a clever pricing system, not clever software.

$1 does not mean the same thing to all customers. Obviously rich customers, say corporations, CEOs, etc. can pay more for something then the average Joe. Software that targets corporations or governments obviously will have a sticker price orders of magnitude higher then, say, a blog-authoring tool. But it is a mistake to conclude that just because a blogger can’t part with more money, that blogging software is less useful then “enterprise” email clients. Both fundamentally are communication tools, and both have changed the way that people interact.

Measuring “Good”

So how do you measure quality? There are several ways. User satisfaction, though hard to quantify, is probably the best. I recently attended a Red Cross training session on how to use AEDs. The teacher highly recommended the Zoll brand units we had purchased, and told us a few war-stories about how well Zoll-made equipment held up in the field, even after being dropped off the back of ambulances, and run over with a fire-engine. You only get high praise from your users by doing things right. (It’s possible to get praise from your customers by being cheap)

Another measure is productivity — how much more have people been able to do by using new software? This is quantifiable as time-to-complete-a-project or projects-completed-per-unit-time. However, it may be expensive to measure.

Unfortunately there is no silver bullet. Measurement is always difficult to do well — especially outside of a laboratory. Profit and sales are a data point. And they can tell you something — but they are not a good proxy for utility, satisfaction, or quality.

Powered by WordPress