I was attending a LAN gaming session (aka. real “social gaming”) with a group of friends a while ago. Last time, we spent a lot of time installing (and updating) games and trying to get computers to find each other and I had to borrow someone else’s computer. This time, we were quickly up and running and I could proudly play on my MacBook Pro.

Sure, I had installed Windows 7 using Bootcamp on my Mac, because while VMware Fusion was okay for Tales of Monkey Island and even Torchlight, it just doesn’t cut it for hardcore gaming. The only game that I had any problems running over Bootcamp was, oddly enough, Postal 2. Otherwise, I was equal among my PC using peers. I had dreamed about this day.

But what really made things easy for all of us was Valve’s Steam, a gaming portal/service.

The iTunes model strikes again.

Steam ...for the rest of us

We have passed a long time the point where new games are automatically better than older just due to technological improvements. We were still playing games we played over 3 years ago, and some of them were “old” even by then, like Unreal Tournament 2004. The reasons for this are Windows XP and DirectX. These two technologies have enabled a decade of games that are still playable almost without any emulation. The biggest change is happening right now with multicore and 64bit CPUs.

What Steam has done is basically something that other forms of entertainment could learn a lot about, if they could get over their stone age business logic and hunting down their customers. PC game piracy has always been a problem and one reason why PC gaming today seems to be an afterthought to console gaming. Steam (and other similar services, like Impulse) mostly eliminates the piracy problem with a central authorization structure, but yet provides added value to the customer. You only need to install Steam on any computer and log in and you have access to all your games (provided that you have the bandwidth to download the over 2 GB that most games today use). This is something that isn’t possible with iTunes and only recently was possible with Spotify.

What really sets Steam apart here from other entertainment industry offerings is actual value for users. What Steam has done, is really catch the long tail of ecommerce, even though the concept of long tail has long since gone out of fashion. By being able to sell couple of years old games that are virtually impossible to find anywhere (legally) and for a fraction of the price is just amazing. I was able to buy Psychonauts, the most amazing game ever, for just 2 euros and even at the normal price of 9,99 euros it’s 1/4th of what it did cost on the shelves (and it still costs around 15 euros on Amazon). After the Steam’s holiday sales during Christmas, I found out that I had bought many games, mostly because the price was right.

Other benefits from using Steam is that all your games are automatically updated and even for some games, your progress and settings are saved in the “Steam Cloud” – allowing you to play seamlessly on multiple computers.

But there aren’t any games for Mac

The year 2010 turned to be a pleasant surprise for gamers, especially for those, like me, who have switched to Mac. First, Telltale Games announced that their games would be available for Mac as well. This was excellent news for all Sam & Max and Monkey Island fans who would no longer need to boot up VMware Fusion.

And, sure, there have always been Civilization IV and The Sims 3 for Mac, but having new, native games for Mac was excellent news. Clearly a certain threshold has been breached and the amount of gamers living in self-denial on Mac is now large enough that the market is suddenly viable.

Nothing could have prepared us, the people who still reflexivly keep our left fingers on WASD and use multi-button mice, for the annoucement from Valve that both Steam and Valve’s game engine Source would be available for Mac.

Now, I don’t see that this will mean that soon Mac OS X would be equal gaming platform with Windows, but it does warm my heart. I know that I still need to boot to Windows to really enjoy gaming. The reason Telltale and Valve have been able to pull this out is based on their choices to use cross-platform frameworks (like OpenGL) instead of Windows-only technologies like DirectX. You also need to keep in mind that both Telltale and Valve seem to have target audiences that use Macs and have both targeted certain niches, the former makes high quality “casual” adventure games and the latter high quality first person shooters for more “hardcore” crowd. It is unlikely that other game developers or publishers will follow suit. For a true revolution, Microsoft would need to not only port DirectX to Mac OS X but also develop it at same pace with Windows. Looking at Microsoft’s track record with Mac software, this is even less likely than playing Left 4 Dead natively on Mac looked a couple of months ago. The more likely scenario is that as hardware gets faster and emulating a graphics card gets more efficient, running even the most recent 3D games in VMware Fusion starts to be feasible. A possible scenario is also that through technologies like OpenCL, PC games aren’t as dependent on GPUs and DirectX as they are today.

On the other hand, this shows how Apple’s decision to invest in cross-platform frameworks like OpenGL, OpenCL and WebKit can really pay off in the long term. It also shows that being nice and having something like Bootcamp can be an advantage. I was really surprised how easily I could install Windows 7 on my Mac and how Apple had provided drivers for everything.

What Steam proves is that to succeed on the internet, you really need to be familiar with your customers and understand their needs and truly deliver superior experience and added value to them. This is nothing new, but somehow the rest of the entertainment industry seems to think that they can still get away with last century tactics.

1 person likes this post.

Unlike

The following is a draft I wrote prior to the announcement of the iPad, but which I didn’t publish because it was a series of hypotheses based on an as yet non-existing product. It’s a series of thoughts on how an interface of a touchscreen larger than an iPhone might look like. It is inspired by both my experiences with Macs and since recently with an iPod Touch. Here goes.

A couple of thoughts I had last night (written on 13.01.2010) about interfaces, the current state of development for the iPhone OS, how Apple could build a hybrid of Mac and iPhone OS, and how the company could build multi-tasking into its rumoured tablet. My thought were the following:

a. A new category: I don’t think the iTablet, if it exists, will be either a Mac or an iPhone. My super-superficial reason: it doesn’t fit in the Mac line-up depicted on the online Apple Store (see pic), but a more underlying reason is that I don’t see space for it in either a Mac-category or a Mobile phone/media player category. Which is not to say that it won’t do either well, but I think it will more fall into the class of Netbooks, though of course with the purpose of bombing those low-tech, low-innovation devices out of the water… just like Apple did with MP3 players and with Phones. Note from today: as it turns out, the iPad is depicted below the iPod, iPhone, and Mac lines, but time will tell where it will be once it’s on sale.

b. The Keyboard: I think that any 10″ screen will demand more connectivity to secondary (Apple) devices than the iPhone allows for. That means, an external keyboard and mouse, which transforms the tablet into a desktop. I have less complaints about the software-keyboard now, after working with a Touch for a while, but I still don’t see it as an alternative for longer texts, which a larger screen would warrant. Some months ago, I made a stupid mock-up of the iPhone + a keyboard (see pic), which is how I envision it looking (only better).

c. The App Store: 3 Billion Apps downloaded, Apple just reported, which also suggests a kind of lock-in. For better or worse, developers have accepted the App-store and I think it works for several reasons for both, namely more protection from pirates, more predictability for developers when developing for the black hole that is Apple, and more control by Apple, which is what Apple likes, not to mention new income streams for both. I think the App Store will continue to exist and will present new challenges when talking about a larger screen. Note from today: I don’t believe that what we will get to see in less than two months will be that what people were playing around with after the Apple keynote. iPhone apps inflated to a larger screen, come on?

d: The User Interface: I’ve written previously about Quick Look in Snow Leopard and how I also dug its slight innovation in terms of in-icon playing of media. Previously, OS X also introduced Dashboard into Tiger (I believe), whose interface, on the surface at least, resembles the iPhone. My view is that Apple will give developers the option to just keep the same resolution apps as they have offered before, though not exclusively of course. But imagine “Quick Looking” an app and still having it run inside its “Icon,” while the user does something else. For the rest, I of course think that full-screen Apps will exist, which is where Dashboard comes in, or at least a type of Dashboard. (Note: that was wrong. More below.)

e. Integration with the Mac: One of the most underused interfaces, at least on my Mac, is Dashboard, which allows people to have continuously open widgets on anything from news, to games, to radio, to system monitoring. It’s useful for those purposes, but not really something i spend more than a few minutes at a time with. Yet the first thing that came to mind when thinking of a “Tablet,” using both iPhone and Mac interface components, was Dashboard. It creates a new layer on top of a traditional desktop, allowing for user-input and information display. When I envision someone running the apps that would work on the “iTablet” also, I think of it either being that you open up a new layer on your Mac and run the very same apps on it through something like a Dashboard-like interface. Or, and the simplest solution is usually the best, through having the Tablet sync through iTunes with regular applications on the Mac.

Note from today: well, obviously this was wrong, but there have been several theories aired of having a type of Dashboard on the iPad for apps like calculator and weather, which don’t at all make sense to run in single focus on a larger screen than the iPhone.

Further thoughts from today: I do think that we will see a new OS update for both the iPhone and iPad before the release of the iPad. This will address the concerns that people have about it just being a larger iPod Touch. For the rest, to me the only downside to this device is the lack of a front-facing camera for video-calling, and some minor things. And I also think it’s the perfect “parent device!” What the Wii was to gaming, the iPad is to computing, addressing a very very blue ocean.

As previously stated, I’m still in line to get one this year, though only after trying one first.

Vincent

Like

Unlike

OK, time to write a few words about the iPad. In true spirit of fanboyishness I started (and finished) writing this post in bed on my iPod Touch. Let me start by saying that with reservations I want the iPad. Reservations include that like you, I haven’t actually used the device, and that it doesn’t include a front facing camera which is a real shame. Flash… Pah! I really don’t care. Anyone who experienced the professional look, feel and support you get even from a €0.79 game on the Touch or iPhone isn’t going back to freeware flash (read my Farmville review as an example).

I’m not trying to provoke you by being so dismissive of flash, even though I feel a lot of people really really hate how the iPad turned out. I am only writing out of my own current and past context and reserving final judgement until it’s in my hands.

My context is several. I was born into an age when there weren’t any personal computers. As a matter of fact, Apple had only just been conceived when I was born. I grew up without computers, until I got a toy Amiga at 13, and a very buggy 1st PC at 15. It ran DOS mostly and crashed a lot in Windows 3.1. I mention this because people in my generation suffer from a curse. We were forced to learn a zillion crappy commands as teens, which made our parents and family members consider us computer geniusses and not a week goes by when I don’t get at least 1 question about a bug in a computer. Last week, I spent maybe 5 hours trying to get a Wifi card to communicate with an Internet radio, I will have to set up skype VOIP at my parents’ house this year and who knows what else.

My no. 2 reason for getting an iPad? To give it to my parents and save me future headaches (knock on wood).

My no. 1 reason is different. Last December, my MacBook was lost on a train. I’m using an older MacBook from work at the moment and digging this iPod Touch a lot. In many ways I do more on the Touch now. It has its flaws of course, and no it has nothing to do with “openness” or flash. The screen is too small and there are times (less than you would think) where I need a physical keyboard.

So picture my context. I travel a fair amount, I think the MacBook is not always neccessary but the Touch/iPhone is not always enough. The Touch meets my casual gaming needs (serious games, that’s what consoles are built for), it kind of meets my wordprocessing needs (still typing on the Touch …). So why on earth, for that price, wouldn’t I want an iPad?

Truth be told, I was considering getting a sleek MacBook Pro to replace my lost MacBook. But for years, I’ve secretely lusted after a shiny iMac as well, never being able to justify having both a laptop and a desktop. The iPad is not a standalone PC. It needs to be synced with one (every week or so). But it also gives me a chance not not restrict computing to a small 13-15″ screen and buy a “real” computer so that makes sense to me.

In my UNIQUE context, the iPad makes sense. In my less unique context regarding my parents, it makes sense. 2010 is hopefully a year of less computing headaches and more of just getting things done.

the end
Vincent

Like

Unlike

In my continuous drive to “pimp” my Mac experience, I use this application switcher called “LiteSwitch.” It hasn’t been updated in years, but it still works and amongst some other cool features, it allows me to see (and manipulate) all running processes, including the hidden ones (which I choose to hide on a case-by-case basis).

Here’s what the Google Chrome Browser shows me.

Every time I open multiple tabs, it shows me a process, called Google Chrome Helper. With half a dozen tabs open, I soon have these processes filling up my whole tab-switcher.

I realise that Chrome is in alpha, beta, or whatever disclaimer they use these days, but I just think it’s really messy. Ironically, it is the fastest browser on my system and I really do lean towards it when quickly wanting to browse the net. Even though the average user will not see these aesthetic little bugs, I sincerely hope that they clean it up a.s.a.p.. Even Chromium, its seemingly more mature brother, displays the same behaviour.

Stop being so beta, Google!

/Vincent

Like

Unlike

Whether or not to design a new OS is probably the wrong question to ask at this point. Gruber says that hardware makers should strongly consider going the Apple route and design their OS and hardware combined. I think that the iPhone vs. any other mobile OS battle, and any other standards-battle really, proves that it’s not so much about the OS as it is a about critical mass of apps. At the same time, had the App-less iPhone v1 (lame pun intended) been a badly design hardware+OS, then no one would’ve bought it. But that was threshold 1, which the iPhone got out of and we are in threshold 2 now: features, i.e. Apps.

PC OSs are in the same boat. As much as I like Mac OS X, if it didn’t run the apps that I needed to be productive or unproductive (you know, media & games…), then the chances of me getting a Mac are zero. Any new OS maker is in the same boat, having to think about both their OS and the apps that run on it. A hardware maker designing an OS would have to think about all three dimensions (+ all the other stuff: consumers, partners, etc.).

I think I was fairly down on Android as an OS and fairly up on Chrome OS (COS), long before it either came out. I’m still sort of down on Android and very much up on COS. The reason is for once not hardware or software, it’s the changing world of telecommunication.

I haven’t been silent about my feelings about mobile operators. They’re not good, mostly for people in Europe that travel internationally a lot. And just when some positive movement is happening in terms of mobile and sms roaming charges, we now get Internet roaming, where operators still find plenty of opportunities to gouge consumers. It’s not unusual to pay several Euros/dollars/pounds per MB for instance, which is o.u.t.r.a.g.e.o.u.s.

As such, when I saw the ASUS EEE and all the other Netbook models being offered with subscriptions, I was skeptical. But what I didn’t think much about, because I wasn’t a user at the time, was the opportunities that ubiquitous internet (within roaming reality) offered: by buying a subscription with a laptop you are in fact instantly online, which makes any argument against a NetOS moot. It completely opens up the road for a NetOS maker, like Google, but also like Nokia, RIM, Palm, Apple, Microsoft, etc. to build an OS that entirely operates on a connected backbone. This is the opportunity that I see Chrome OS exploiting and why I think it, as well as the iPhone netbook/tablet if it comes out, will be massively successful.

I still don’t like the idea of hardware enslaving itself to telecom-operators. But I think we really can start thinking about a cable-less world a few years from now, with all the implications (no more offices, augmented shopping, etc.) that it can bring.

Yay mobile net. Yay Net OS.

/ Vincent

(Picture: city in clouds, courtesy of www.crestock.com)

Like

Unlike

When Leopard (10.5) came out, I could mention a laundry list of features that were pretty great. When its spawn/sibling/relative(?) came out in the form of Snow Leopard, I was struck with a serious case of reviewer’s block. There is very little to say about something that really only innovates under the hood and at the fringes.

So, my review today will be short, so short that I won’t talk about more than one feature. And that feature may disappoint you, I know it. But, in the greater picture of things, I think it’s pretty cool.

Stepping over from Windows half a decade ago, I had to adopt a new behaviour. I was forced to use iTunes, which meant that I had to import my whole library into it to make full use of this software and it’s ability to organise music. The iPod also affected this, which, prior to the iPhone/Touch, delegated its entire user-interface to iTunes also, allowing people to create intricate smart- and playlists, download podcasts, etc. in the software, whilst letting the hardware be controlled by one button only.

My musical behaviour on the computer had become somewhat bloated, less spontaneous than before. Leopard (10.5) innovated on this a little, by introducing Quicklook, which, through the space bar, allows for the quick previewing of most files, which is especially nice for movies and occasionally nice with music as well. The problem with the latter is that when you shift the focus to another app, as ADD-affected/music-listening people tend to do frequently, the music stops… quite literally. So it wasn’t a perfect solution.

Snow Leopard (10.6) introduced an improvement to that feature, one that is already affecting the way I listen to music on my Mac. Quicklook still works the way it always did, but what’s new is that you can quick look within an icon. By hovering over a music file on your desktop and changing the display in the finder to large enough icons (they need to be made a certain size (64×64 on my Macbook) for this to work), you will see a play button on the icon, which, when clicking, plays the track or video. And you can keep playing it while you do your other stuff, such as me typing this blog post.

Pretty awesome, if you ask me. No need to fire up iTunes just for that one file and my need to ADD has been satisfied.

/End Review.

Vincent

Like

Unlike

To those people that have followed my writing these last two months, I’ve been exposed to virtualisation more than I would like, due to an incompatibility between my Macbook, a Java Virtualbox I’m running on it, and the Windows 2003 server managing our company network. As a result, I’ve been booting a lot into Windows via Boot Camp, got hooked on Windows Live Writer, and have been using Parallels frequently just for that app (I need a Crossover fix for .NET apps badly).

The second consequence is that I’ve been thinking a lot about the implications of virtual OSs. With Google OS recently having been announced, which is supposed to integrate flawlessly with Macs and Windows, assumably Android, as well as being designed for Netbooks, I wonder if Intel, with it’s multi-core processors, has not created a situation where nothing else matters, hardware-wise, except to have a powerful enough processor? In other words, have hardware-manufacturers like Sony, Samsung, and to some extent, Apple simply become irrelevant?

Take Sony for instance, which has just announced its first “Netbook.” It’s one selling point?

“Like other netbooks the Vaio W has a 10-inch screen, but its display has a resolution of 1,366 by 768 pixels rather than the more common 1,024 by 600 pixels. That means more of a Web site can be fitted onto the screen, and the user will have to scroll less, the company said at a launch event in Tokyo on Tuesday.” (emphasis my own)

Not much to write home about, except if you absolutely need to use a Sony, and bear in mind that that company was at some point a premium manufacturer of technology. The PC market has long been commoditised of course, ever since IBM opened its hardware up to the world, but with the rise of ultra-cheap PCs & laptops, I think they are digging their own grave.

I think that, as I wrote in a comment to a recent post, Netbooks are a failed experiment and, to add to that, unless either drastic changes in the cost-structure can be made to increase profit-margins, or new business models can be found (e.g. a similar hardware-service bundling to what has been happening in the mobile phone space), I think that we won’t be hearing from netbooks after 2010 onwards.

What also seems clear is that software companies, with their much more favourable profit margins, are winning this war, and, pretty soon, they won’t have to think about hardware at all any more. Instead of writing for a “spec,” you just need to write for a virtual space, which can run anywhere or everywhere.

Arguably, hardware has always been enslaved to software (except for one company), but I see the Sony’s & Samsung’s of today becoming the Nokia’s & Motorola’s of the future.

Since I’m not a technologist (more of a technology philosopher), I may be drastically oversimplifying. What do you think?
P.S. going to stop signing my name for a while. I’ll see if that makes a difference. V.

Like

Unlike

From the Official Google Blog:

Today, we’re announcing a new project that’s a natural extension of Google Chrome — the Google Chrome Operating System. It’s our attempt to re-think what operating systems should be.

Google Chrome OS will run on both x86 as well as ARM chips and we are working with multiple OEMs to bring a number of netbooks to market next year. The software architecture is simple — Google Chrome running within a new windowing system on top of a Linux kernel. For application developers, the web is the platform. All web-based applications will automatically work and new applications can be written using your favorite web technologies. And of course, these apps will run not only on Google Chrome OS, but on any standards-based browser on Windows, Mac and Linux thereby giving developers the largest user base of any platform.

I have nothing to say that I haven’t already said before.

Like

Unlike

It’s around that time again. First of all, I’d again like to note that I am, for the moment, the producer of 99% of the junk, eh, I mean Gold that appears before your eyes on Tech IT Easy. So, for the moment, these are favourite posts that I wrote.

If you are interested in contributing to Tech IT Easy, either as a blogger or guest writer, please write to us!

This month, I’d like to thank Georgia for writing about guerrilla marketing. Last month, I forgot to thank Jeremy for publishing his interview with social marketeer, Michelle Greer, and Georgia, for writing about Mint.com.

Let’s get to the favourites (in no particular order):

• The “captain’s chair” phenomenon, in which I identify a problem that many one-person-companies-growing-into-SMEs face, the centralisation of leadership around the founder, and the lack of processes that facilitate delegation. Expect more posts about this.
• A short guide for surviving Windows [aimed at Mac-users], in which in a series of a few posts, I start discussing how to survive that “traumatic” move. While I have certainly managed to, I am now happily back on my Mac at work. Even so, I am writing this post on Windows Live Writer, through Parallels (it’s what I call an anchor-app, something that ties you to an environment). Related: Awakening from the OS X vs. Windows War and Battles in the Virtualization Space.
• Media’s Basic Duty to tell the Truth (P.S. Blogs are not Media), in which I, again in a series of posts,  defend Techcrunch’s reputation, in regards to their accusation towards Last.fm. My premise: blogs (like ours) are not media, but some professional blogs, like Techcrunch, have become its equivalent and thus (have to) respect the same principle of reporting the news as accurately and honestly. I don’t want to generalise though, I think that Arrington’s posts in particular, can be much too emotional, provocative, and definitely more blog than pro-media.
• Where do Good Ideas come from?, in which I propose four areas and write about the ease of implementing these ideas. Two supplement posts: On having Heroes in your Craft and The Right Mix between Idea and Execution and One reason not to blog (at least not to blog about your plans) (I sure do blog a lot about idea generation… ).
• What would an Always-On Device look like? Do we even want it?, which comes down to that I would like a device that records everything that I do, in whatever format needed. Some complications: a. do we even want it? How would we process the information? I think that suitable devices already exist, from your camera phone to more specialised and expensive methods.

That’s it for this month. May’s recap can be found here. Until the next time, on Tech IT Easy.

Vincent

Like

Unlike

I hate Windows Explorer and I hate Mac OS X Finder, but what I hate even more is when applications try to replace them by moving all the files into a new, more app-friendly structure. Plenty of examples on the Mac-side, I am, not sadly, no longer an expert on Windows software.

The problem with the Finder / Explorer is that, while they are perfectly suitable for storing and organising files, they are painfully lacking in presenting files in a way that a human or group of humans can understand. The problem / opportunity is also that Explorer/Finder is the standard in as far that every organisation uses it to organise their files. Replacing it by a information system that uses its own proprietary structure to organise files, people, and activities just adds to the learning curve, particularly if, as most experience shows, the software ends up not being that great and the company has to switch.

So, what I’m looking for is the following. An application that:

• works on Macs and PCs (The first is not an absolute prerequisite, it’s only because I work on a Mac)
• Better: is either web- or LAN-based (solves the cross-platform problem)
• acts as a front-end for the explorer, without actually changing the locations of files (except if a user wants it)
• allows users to:
  • sort files into “playlists,” again without changing the location of the files;
  • give long descriptions to files, not just available in a hidden “info” section;
  • assign files and tasks to groups and group-members;
  • assign due dates / sync with calendars;
  • etc. etc., you get the idea.
• Can certainly cost money, must be licensable on a company-basis, and must have a trial period of at least 3 months (it takes at least that long to deploy, adopt, and adapt it on an organisational level).

It’s such an obvious thing that such a software probably already exists. If you know of a good one, please let me know in the comments or per mail.

Vincent

Like

Unlike

I want to keep this short and leave the floor to you mostly, as I’m not a software developer or smart enough for this topic, I’m just a consumer and user of the product. On the train to my parents for this Easter weekend, two young guys were eying me and my Macbook and, seeing that I was wearing earphones perhaps, discussing the mac. One guy said to the other: “those Macs look like they’re taking over the world. Did you see the new one, it looks slick, but it costs € 1500.” And the other guy responded: “How dare they?” Whereas the other guy said: “Well, they look pretty cool, but interface-wise, I could never get used to them.” And the conversation died after that.

So what makes Macs so cool. Rather than discuss the superficial, the hardware, I just want to briefly write about why I like the Mac OS “interface,” and then leave the floor to you, answering the question: “What makes OS X so damn great?”

My impression: I don’t know how to explain it exactly, maybe it’s because OS X is Unix based. But what I really dig about OS X (Tiger & Leopard) is that every menu-function, every possible action you’d want to undertake, can somehow be translated into a script or service, and thus entered in Quicksilver or another “launcher.” That means that my hands rarely have to leave the keyboard, which I think saves me a few seconds vs. going for the mouse/trackpad, point & clicking. It also means that my Dock [Apple's application launcher] and desktop are clean most of the time, as I don’t need a “visible” shortcut to get to the destination I want.

I could never get that same workflow going on Windows, and perhaps it’s because of the architecture, that it just isn’t written to be that open. Sure, things like SizeUp and Fresh, both of which I discussed last week, are not part of the Leopard interface, but the fact that they exist, the fact that Quicksilver exists, is actually what makes OS X 10 times as effective an OS to me. Once again, I don’t know why exactly this is the case, I attribute it to the open architecture of Unix.

So, now it’s your turn: why makes OS X so damn great (or not, if that’s where you want to take it)?

Have a nice Easter weekend!
Vincent

Like

Unlike

I’m sure I’m not the only switcher to find the Finder windows on the Mac… a little tedious (Finder is, to those that don’t know, the Explorer equivalent on the Mac). Nobody can explain exactly what the green button does (it supposedly zooms to the perfect size for what’s in the window, but what does that mean?), and it seems like the least flexible application on the Mac. A number of Finder, aka file-management, alternatives exist, the most famous one being Path Finder, which is a something of an overkill, I think, but it has a loyal fan base.

SizeUp only recently came to the market, previously being a freeware app called TwoUp, which has now been supplemented with this pay-what’s-fair app. Paying what’s fair incidentally means, ca. $1.50 (or € 1.70) and upwards, which is a great system I think.

What SizeUp does is allowing you to assign keyboard shortcuts to how you want a window to be placed. You can have two windows sideways, like so:

Or four windows on the screen, like so:

Not to mention, assign a shortcut to maximise a window to fill the screen (finally!!!). As mentioned, you can use TwoUp for free and get SizeUp at a fair price. So grab a copy and make your life easier here!

Vincent

Like

Unlike

Dear App-maker and Apple,

I appreciate Spaces a lot as a feature on Leopard. I think it makes me more productive, in the sense that I am now completely focussed on my blog editor in space 2, and all the other distracting apps are stowed away in the other spaces. But Spaces isn’t perfect, which is part Apple’s fault and part Apps’ fault.

Exhibit 1: the preference pane

The Spaces preferences are a mess, one long list of messes. When adding an app to a certain space, it doesn’t go to that app in the list, instead it adds it, I have to search for it, and find it has been set to the latest space I used or assigned an app to (which is a actually good, I’m not a whiner).

Why is all of this centralised? If I want to see what space an app is assigned to, why not have me do that in the app-preferences? To me it makes so much more sense to install an app, go to its preferences or a menu-item, and just set the space from there. Instead of having to dig through the bloated preference pane.

Exhibit 2: the auto-switching

OK, I actually don’t have a problem with selecting an app and having it open in its appropriate space. But what I do have a problem is apps ripping me away from the space I’m in, sometimes multiple times, because… I don’t know, they call for it? This happens with Pages, with Marsedit, with Safari, and I don’t know what. Somehow, when it loads up stuff, like webpages or those pesky floating info-windows, it calls Spaces to attention and poof, I am ripped away from what I was currently doing.

That Sir, is not my definition of a productivity enhancer.

I have now set Spaces to not auto-switch, but what I would really like is for a. this not to happen and for b. to be able to set, per app, which one auto-swicthes and which doesn’t—another case for having Spaces be included in app-preferences.

Exhibit 3: ghost dialogue boxes

Regardless of what app I use, this happens constantly. Dialogue-boxes don’t always open in the same space as the app is in. Instead, a dialogue box opens, I know it does, but I can’t find it. And when I switch between Spaces, I sometimes see it floating by, like a ghost again. Hiding the app in front of it doesn’t work, the dialogue box disappears too. I have to minimise the app(S) in front of it, to find that stupid box. Not effective!

I want dialogue boxes per app to stick to the space they are set to, and preferably stay on top (if anyone knows a hack for the latter, post a comment).

In conclusion…

I assume that most of this is a design error on the part of Apple, but I’d really like for this to be improved. Exhibit 1 is clearly a user-interface issue, which could be drastically improved by allowing preferences to be set per app. Exhibit 2 and 3 are bugs, no more no less, and I hope that Apple gets it together and fixes it.

Like

Unlike

About 6 months ago, or longer, Jason Calacanis wrote an essay about what he viewed as the optimal setup, furniture-wise, for the productivity centre that is a startup. Jeremy wrote a response here, as well. I’m sure, things have changed, with the recession and all, but my mantra about that is… don’t dispair, just work harder. In other words, I’m ignoring the recession… just working harder. The setup of an office shouldn’t change, that’s an investment in your productivity.

This last week, I spent in Luxembourg, evaluating whether or not to take on a position in an accountancy. I may write more about this in the future, I may not, but it also confronted me with the topic of productivity in a group-environment. Writing my thesis, I think, has turned me into a “Getting Things Done” freak, reading that book hasn’t helped either, of course.

Right now, I’m working on a dated PC, with a dual screen setup, on Windows 2000, running software that keeps track of the many official documents that form the core of “being accountable,” writing on a French keyboard with crazy letter-placements… sigh. This post is, luckily, written on an international keyboard, on my trusted Mac, which would be my machine of choice as well. Oh, and we have one of the best coffee machines on the market (I will edit this post with the name tomorrow, when I’m back in the office. Edit: the magic word is SAECO), and the chairs are, afaik, of great quality.

Do Macs increase productivity?

So Jason and I agree on this at least, Macs increase productivity. That said, life is not quite that simple. Working in a group-environment, in a legal environment, puts a certain responsibility on you, that you have to produce in an environment that is compatible with everyone else. My Mac would help me, but would only work if, either, everyone had Macs, and if the software, I worked with, is cross-compatible between Windows & Macs, which this one isn’t, afaik.

What I don’t like about Windows… I could write an essay about this, but mainly that it doesn’t feel like it’s designed for most machines I work on. My Mac is a dinosaur, but I run the latest OS on it no problem. Office 2008, on the other hand, that’s a different story.

Verdict: depending on software, hardware, and co-workers / business-partners, both Windows and Macs can increase productivity. Definitely not a black & white issue.

What about dual screen setups?

Having worked with Leopard spaces, ever since I first reviewed it, I’m quite used to have different screens for different activities. However, the way it works on a Mac, when I go to a screen, I only get to see that screen. In a physical multi-screen setup, you see both screens, the advantage being, that you can keep your permanently-used apps (e.g. Word) on one screen and your once-in-while apps (e.g. Outlook) in the other. It’s also somewhat useful for copying text from one app to the other (not copy-paste, but typing out text… on a French keyboarrrrrrd, grrrr).

What I don’t like, however, is that the app-placement is not straightforward—this seems like it can be set up in the ATI-software, but I have no idea where exactly to do this. The Mac-spaces setup can also be frustrating, but is at least understandable and part of the OS. With two physical screens, it also feels like the mouse has to travel much farther, something that isn’t a problem when using multiple virtual desktops, which you can switch to at a finger-click.

My verdict: if you’re constantly switching between multiple apps, then a multi-screen setup can be useful, but I don’t see it as better than Leopard’s spaces.

Should you have a great coffee-machine?

Coming from a guy that’s been drinking green tea for several weeks now, and switched to coffee as soon as he arrived here, my answer is a big fat yes. I remember Jason writing something about saving you the trip to Starbucks. That isn’t actually a problem in Luxembourg, there’s good coffee everywhere (much like in the rest of Europe), and isn’t why I say this.

Good coffee is good for two reasons: it boosts productivity and it boosts morale. The reason coffee is so popular because we live under the reality / illusion (depending where you come from) that it wakes us up. Good coffee boosts coffee consumption and should hence boost energy.

Coffee is also popular because people love it, and people love good coffee more than bad coffee. Hence, good coffee = happier people. As a manager you can now say: look, I know I scream at you guys sometimes. But here’s some good coffee, now please get back to work. Done.

Answer: yes.

What about furniture?

I think that IKEA makes perfectly affordable furniture that works great as well (big fan), so I see this as a basic expense that every business needs to make. And you need to have furniture that allows people to be comfortable for longer periods of time. Not only the 0 to 24 hours a day, you spend in the office, but the many months to years that you will work in that same office as well.

Answer: yes, but it doesn’t have to be expensive.

Other factors?

I’m too tired to think of them now. Furnishing your office feels like spicing your food. Food will often taste fine without spices, but add the right spice and it creates taste-explosions in your mouth.

Well, that’s my sentiment. Who’s next?

Vincent

Like

Unlike

Please note: “A” Mac-man, One. Not All of them! Today was probably the most innovative Mac-release since… well, the MacBook Air came out. Glass, button-less trackpads, led-backlit screens, combined NVIDIA GPUs and chipsets on one die, A super-rigid single piece (well I think it’s two main ones actually) casing. The new Macbook looks awesome! I’m drooling on my keyboard right now.

The funny thing is that my Mac is slightly over three years old, and I’m sure the amount of my drool will be about the same as the guy/girl that bought a Mac a few months ago. That’s just Apple-reality and how innovative this update really is.

This piece is entitled the psychology of a Mac-man, because that is who I am. I’ve only owned one Mac in my whole life, but I was enticed by this machine, the iBook 12″ G4, well before I bought it. Approaching it like a true geek, I researched all of my options. I wanted a small machine, didn’t even think of OSX or any “think different” factor, but just wanted the best in my budget, about €1000.

The choice

I chose this machine for 5 reasons:

• the keyboard was meant to be comfortable to type on
• the screen was matte and good for super-long viewing
• the machine was durable (Macs have an average life-time of ca. 4 years+)
• a reasonable batterylife of 4 hours
• reasonably portable at ca. 2 KGs

All the other machines I could get back then were priced like they are now, between €500-1500 and mostly seemed like they would fall apart in a few years. The only alternative worth considering was a Lenovo/IBM Thinkpad of ca. €2000: also super-wellbuilt and a good quality keyboard.

Software didn’t enter my mind at all. I was a Windows-man before that and knew that OS inside-out. I just assumed that I would learn OSX just as quick and that MS Office would keep me compatible with the rest of the world.

The wait was agonising, I remember. Every beep on the street, every car passing by, would make me run to the window.

My companion

When I finally got my machine, it was magical. A white box, I was unpacking it with a friend. It just felt special, different from anything I bought before. OSX Tiger just looked cool.

In the months to follow, that laptop would become my constant companion. It was my baby and one that I would even wake up with sometime (sad, I know). But back then, writing was my life and I loved to go to a café and just type until the battery ran out.

Intel-Macs came out soon after. Suddenly the world changed: White Macbooks everywhere. Where before I was cool and unique, now everyone became the same. Of course, I was tempted to upgrade, like most of you are now, but I just kept repeating: I love my Mac, I love my Mac. And I did.

That love was expressed externally and internally. Countless were the discussions I had with people about Macs. I blogged about it here and on my old blog. In my short period of Mac-zen, I’ve convinced close to 10 people to “upgrade” to the Mac way of life.

And I learned to become more productive on it too, using many of the little things I wrote about before. I know so much about my Mac that it’s scary.

And when Leopard came out, unlike the new Vista, it ran just fine on my old Mac and I knew I could keep it for a while longer!

Drama

About 6 months ago, tragedy happened. Somehow my internal Airport-card had loosened (or so I guessed) and I was getting kernel-crashes every-time I tried to put it to sleep or reboot it. There’s something else that is special about Macs. When something is wrong, hard- or software, it tells you exactly what it is. That is the benefit of having that closed system that so many people (including me) sometimes criticise. Unlike a Vista-PC, I tried to fix a few weeks back, where I had no clue what was wrong.

Because I was skimmed these last few months, graduating, job-seeking, etc., I didn’t fix my Mac. Instead, it became a server-like entity, which I sometimes kept running for over a month. It was crazy, super-irrational, but it worked. I didn’t want to restart it too often, because it would act like an old car. I would press the power-button, and it would make a sound, then nothing. I would turn it off and try again. Again a sound and nothing! I would leave it running, warm it up, you know. Then off and on again. Aah, finally it would start! But it was a nerve-wrecking experience and I just tried to keep it running as long as possible instead.

Revolution!

Then, last week, I took it to the next level. I knew what the problem was, and I didn’t care anymore. I was just going to try and fix it.

With the help of a French instructional video, my Swiss army-knife, and a credit-card, I started the operation. The thing to realise about my iBook and, I think, the Macbook Pros as well, is that doing anything internally is hell. There are countless screws, you have to know what you’re doing at all times.

But ok, I unscrewed 39 screws. I saw more of my baby then I ever wanted to see. I shoved credit-cards into it, I cleaned it, I screwed and put the screws into little diagrams I drew on paper. My heart would be racing and I’d clean the plastic parts from the inside to calm me down. Finally, I came to the Airport-card and I secured it with a piece of paper (as advised). I screwed 39 screws back in, attached cables, and prayed.

Finally, I pressed the button. Chime! Grey screen! Blue screen! Log-in

I wrote on Twitter:

And I f**cking fixed it!

Epilogue

My love for this thing has been re-ignited. Its battery-life is still over 4 hours long (under special conditions), I love using it on the road and typing away at reports and what not. Apples rock!

Next morning addendum: I realise that I didn’t say why I wrote this post and what I think of the new Macbooks within that context. I guess I’m saying that if you have a Mac now, you should look at it closely before upgrading to the next version and the next. They are often… with some exceptions… well-designed and built to last. And, while I think the current Macbooks are even better designed and built to last even longer, you can be certain that soon after you get it, there will be another (incremental) upgrade, and another, eventually placing you in exactly the same boat you are now. In my opinion, it’s better to make best of what you have—you can still make make graphics with Photoshop 3, for god’s sake—than being an upgrade junkie. Use-cases may vary.

There you have it, the psychology of one Mac-Man.

The end,

Vincent

Like

Unlike