kip/bot/blog

TechCrunch, while writing about something else (Flowww, a visualized RSS feed algorithm), backs into a critique of the Apple cover flow mode:

The other issue I have is that, while the site is pretty, the Cover Flow metaphor just doesn’t work for me as a navigational tool. It is too slow and it forces you to look at the pre-selected sites in the order that the algorithm (or Zotter) picks them. If you want to read the middle story, you have to flip through all the previous ones to get to it. I’d rather pick my own stories from a list of headlines, thank you very much.

Over the last several years, I’ve seen many versions of this pop up in designs for client work.  I’ve never liked it — the rate of information transfer is slow, the visuals rarely sit together nicely or in a way that allows for easy scanning, there’s a lot of guess work in locating yourself somewhere along the spectrum (and maddening to re-find something after you’ve moved away from it).  I don’t like it, but I keep my mouth shut, usually.  After all, Apple does it, and they . . . well, Apple does it!

The techcrunch writer asks for thoughts and a conversation is starting.  It would be nice to have some data or real learning about this.

I can’t keep track of where I read anything anymore, but I’m pretty sure I’ve read some strong convictions against links called “Link” or “Here”. But the screenshot below, from Wikipedia’s “In the News” today highlights one of my frustrations with embedded links:

The links are pretty messy:

NASA == Wikipedia entry on NASA

rings (first time) == Rings_of_Rhea on Wikipedia

Saturnian moon == moons_of_Saturn on Wikipedia

Rhea == Wikipedia enty of the moon Rhea

rings == planetary_rings on Wikipedia

moon == moon on Wikipedia

Two links with the same name pointing to different things, no link that points to the announcement or the evidence, three words abutting which look like one link, but are in fact two. Bleh. And “(picture)” refers to a picture at the top of the module.

Now, part of the problem is, presumably, that Wikipedia doesn’t want to point to the actual news story. But this is a perfect example of why you can’t always embed links.

Nice implementation, if you will, of a vacuum cleaner bag. My last vacuum, which I loved (major power!), had perfectly square bags, with perfectly square cardboard around a perfectly round rubber seal. Even when I tried to remember how I removed the previous bag, it was trial and error getting the new bag in — lots of rips and misalignments. No mistakes possible with my new Miele, though! It has a guide, and matching arrows on the bag and the guide and no need to mess with the seal . . . the guide puts it in place for you.