Written to last

Handpicked

Marco Arment, in his recent post Lasting value, concludes:

My primary outputs, professionally, are software and writing. This is what I’m contributing to the world. None of the software I write today is likely to still be in use in thirty years, but if I write a truly great and timeless article, that could be valuable to people for much longer.

I’m going to continue to write about what’s happening in our industry. But I’m also glad that I had this chance to step back and get some perspective on my work, because I haven’t written nearly enough articles recently that I’ll be proud to show off more than a few months from now.

This is why, since I began writing about technology online more consistently back in 2005, I’ve always tried to avoid covering every trending tech topic or turning my blog into a ‘breadcrumb blog’ filled with quick bits of commentary, choosing to focus on longer articles and analyses. Four months ago, when I was importing the 2005–2010 archives from my old blogs, I had to go through a lot of posts to correct any internal links that could redirect readers to the old URLs, and I found a lot of pieces that were still enjoyable despite having been written four or five years ago. 

Importing five years of archives has indeed been a daunting task, and there were moments I honestly wondered whether it was worthwhile to do that. But soon after I realised it was. Archives are important for many reasons: people who have recently discovered my blog can go back and have a better idea of where I come from and what my perspective is. And I can do periodical ‘self-checks’ to see if and how I’ve changed my mind about certain subjects, whether my writing style has improved, whether my ability to analyse and synthesise has improved, and so on.

It’s too bad that, today, most places online (especially tech-oriented blogs and sites) shove short, ephemeral bits in the face of the reader, encouraging a sort of ‘disposable writing’ as I call it; articles or breadcrumbs made of link + one-line comment whose shelf-life doesn’t last two weeks. In my little corner of the Internet I keep trying to go in the opposite direction. So, when you notice I’m not updating this place for two or three days, feel free to browse the archives — perhaps you’ll find something equally interesting even if it’s not ‘fresh’.

(See also Morrick’s digest)

How to deal with email overload

Handpicked

Peter Bregman, in Coping with Email Overload, acknowledges the problem of how bad the ’email habit’ can get:

I’ve come to the conclusion that I use email to distract myself. Whenever I feel the least bit uneasy, I check my email. Stuck while writing an article? Bored on a phone call? Standing in an elevator, frustrated in a meeting, anxious about an interaction? Might as well check email. It’s an ever-present, easy-access way to avoid my feelings of discomfort. […]

But it’s become a serious problem. When we don’t control our email habit, we are controlled by it. Everyone I know complains about email overload.

Email pours in, with no break to its flow. And like addicts, we check it incessantly, drawing ourselves away from meetings, conversations, personal time, or whatever is right in front of us.

But it’s not just the abundance of email that’s our problem — it’s the inefficiency in how we deal with it. Each time we check our email on the fly, we lose time pulling out our phones, loading the email, reading new emails without taking action on them, and re-reading those to which we haven’t yet responded. Then, back at our computers, we re-read them again.

Thankfully, I’m not gravely affected by the problem of email overload. Sure, every now and then I accumulate a bit of a backlog of emails that need a response (as for keeping up with the Inbox flow I tend to be up-to-date all the time, especially with incoming mail on my three main accounts), but never with emails that need an urgent action on my part. Replying to normal or low priority emails is usually an activity I leave for late at night, after working all day. But if work has been particularly merciless and has sucked up all my attention and energies, I might be too tired to handle emails at the end of the day, so I postpone the task to the next day. 

By the way, I don’t think this is an inefficient method: all my daily activities are organised more by priority than type, and I generally process low priority emails in a reasonable time. There are, admittedly, some exceptions (long delays in getting back to a sender), but I never, ever ignore an email. And, more importantly, I always reply even when the answer to some request is ‘No’ or ‘Sorry, I can’t help you’, unlike many other people who too often use email silence as a subtle way to tell you ‘Don’t bother me’, ‘No way’, ‘Leave me alone’.

For those who can’t manage the constant flow of incoming emails, however, and often find themselves resorting to the ‘Mark All Read’ command, Bregman gives sound advice:

Instead of checking email continuously and from multiple devices, schedule specific email time during the day while you are at your computer. All other time is email vacation time.

We are most efficient when we answer email in bulk at our computers. We move faster, can access files when we need them, and link more quickly and easily to other programs like our calendars. Also, when we sit down for the express purpose of doing emails, we have our email heads on. We are more focused, more driven, wasting no time in transition from one activity to another.

I bulk process my email three times a day in 30-minute increments, once in the morning, once mid-day, and once before shutting down my computer for the day. I use a timer and when it beeps, I close my email program.

Outside my designated email times I don’t access my email — from any device — until my next scheduled email session. I no longer use my phone for email unless I’m away from my computer all day.

When the urge to check arises — and it arises often — I take a deep breath and feel whatever feelings come up. And then I focus on whatever I’m doing, even if what I’m doing is waiting. I let my mind relax.

Here’s what I’ve found: I don’t miss a thing. 

I think it’s a good approach because it both deals with when/how to process emails, and with the stress related to the bad habit of checking emails compulsively.

(Via Shawn Blanc)

Un Leone domato

Mele e appunti

Quando Apple presentò alcune delle funzioni principali di OS X 10.7 Lion prima all’evento Back to the Mac dell’ottobre 2010, e poi alla WWDC del giugno 2011, non ne fui granché impressionato. C’erano degli aspetti del sistema senza dubbio interessanti: per come lavoro io, per esempio, l’introduzione di una funzionalità di salvataggio automatico estesa a tutto Mac OS X era forse una delle novità più significative. L’uso intenso di una piccola ma straordinaria applicazione come Notational Velocity mi aveva ormai abituato bene (in NV non esiste il comando Salva, ogni modifica viene automaticamente registrata); per non parlare del mio fido Newton MessagePad, che uso tuttora ogni giorno, e che anch’esso implementa la caratteristica del salvataggio automatico e permanente di qualsiasi informazione venga inserita nel palmare. (E sto parlando di tecnologia degli anni 1993–1997).

Tornando a Lion, nei mesi precedenti la sua introduzione ufficiale mi sono naturalmente tenuto aggiornato sulla sua evoluzione. Non avendo la possibilità di provare io stesso una beta del sistema, ho letto con interesse le impressioni di sviluppatori Mac e tecnologi autorevoli, e la mia diffidenza verso il nuovo felino cresceva. In particolare, mi lasciavano perplesse le contaminazioni di iOS, sia estetiche che funzionali. Launchpad mi sembrava una sciocchezza, Mission Control mi appariva in realtà più confuso della precedente combinazione Exposé+Spaces, e tutta la prominenza data alle gestualità multi-touch sapeva più di espediente carino, ma superficiale, e ideato favorendo il trackpad come periferica di input — ottimo per chi ha un Mac portatile, un po’ meno per i possessori di iMac, Mac mini e Mac Pro e in genere per chi utilizza mouse e tavolette grafiche. 

Nel mio Appunti apparso su iCreate 88, scrivevo:

Forse vi sembrerà strano, ma per me Lion sta diventando un aggiornamento assai controverso. È la prima volta che una nuova versione di Mac OS X mi ha fatto pensare non solo a effettuare un semplice backup di sicurezza dei miei dati, ma addirittura a clonare il disco principale del mio Mac su un’unità esterna e a creare una configurazione dual boot Snow Leopard/Lion. È la prima volta che sto aspettando così tanto prima di aggiornare; che sto considerando molto attentamente quel bilancio di benefici e compromessi di cui sopra; che ho l’impressione che quel che Lion mi offre compensa a malapena quel che mi costringe ad abbandonare. Intendiamoci, è un punto di vista personalissimo che nulla vuol togliere a quella che comunque è una delle versioni di Mac OS X più rilevanti di tutta la sua storia.

Forse il cambiamento per me più duro da digerire che Lion avrebbe portato con sé era l’abbandono definitivo della compatibilità con le applicazioni PowerPC, che potevano girare nei Mac con processori Intel grazie a un pezzetto di software di sistema chiamato Rosetta. Per il mio lavoro mi appoggio ancora ad alcuni programmi PowerPC, a suo tempo pagati una cifra cospicua, e passare a Lion significava dover complicare il flusso di lavoro riavviando in Snow Leopard o spostando quei programmi e i dati relativi su un Mac più datato da affiancare alla macchina principale.

Lion è uscito a luglio 2011. Ho aspettato fino alla fine di ottobre prima di aggiornare, ma poi ho aggiornato. Dopo una settimana d’uso la mia reazione è stata: “Quanto rumore per nulla”. Sono bastati pochi accorgimenti iniziali per mettermi subito a mio agio, come ripristinare lo scorrimento precedente (per me molto più naturale dello ‘scorrimento naturale’ proposto da Lion), disattivare quei gesti multi-touch in palese conflitto con le mie abitudini, togliere Launchpad dal Dock eliminando anche ogni gesto o combinazione di tasti a esso associati, rendere di nuovo visibile la mia Libreria utente, e così via.

Per quanto riguarda i dettagli in stile iOS dell’interfaccia grafica (barre di scorrimento, applicazioni a tutto schermo) ammetto con una punta di imbarazzo che si sono dimostrati più usabili di quanto avessi previsto, e ho scoperto che anche Mission Control si è rivelato meno disastroso rispetto alle mie aspettative. Altre piacevoli sorprese riguardano la stabilità del sistema (può essere perché sono passato direttamente a OS X 10.7.2, evitando bug e problemi presenti nella 10.7.0 e 10.7.1); gli effettivi miglioramenti di certe applicazioni come Mail, TextEdit e Safari, che uso sempre, e di altre come Anteprima, che prima usavo di tanto in tanto e ora con crescente frequenza. 

Altrettanto sorprendente per me è stato l’adattamento a un sistema senza Rosetta. Strumenti che ritenevo assolutamente indispensabili si sono dimostrati in parte sostituibili, e mi sono accorto che certi software PowerPC, seppur di grande utilità, vengono utilizzati più sporadicamente di quanto credessi, e il fatto di doverli usare su una macchina secondaria non è poi così scomodo come ero stato portato a pensare in un primo momento. Il facile interscambio di dati reso possibile da servizi come Dropbox e SugarSync ha decisamente attutito il colpo.

La morale è semplice: bisogna interagire con la tecnologia usando il buonsenso, tenendo la mente aperta, e avendo un certo grado di flessibilità. Nell’uso del Mac, come di qualsiasi dispositivo, è normale crearsi un insieme di abitudini per velocizzare tutta una serie di processi e attività. Non dico di buttare tutto appena arriva una novità come Lion, ma di considerare la possibilità che certi elementi di tale novità siano utili da incorporare in quelle abitudini per renderci ancora più efficienti. Questo atteggiamento è stato per me essenziale nel passaggio a Lion.

[Nota: Questo articolo è originariamente apparso nella mia rubrica Appunti nel numero 93 della rivista iCreate, uscito a febbraio 2012]

Richard Weston photographs his Penguin & Pelican paperbacks

Handpicked

Penguins and Pelicans

Richard Weston wrote:

Much to the delight of the rest of my family, I got ALL of my Penguin and Pelican paperbacks out last week. Took a few photos but also updated my Flickr sets with design credits for Main Series, Crime, Education, Specials and Pelicans.

I’ve been following Richard Weston’s Ace Jet 170 weblog for a while, but I must have missed this entry last month. If you love book design, you have to take a look at his Penguin Books Flickr collection. It’s hard to pick a favourite set in all that gorgeousness, but I really love the covers of the New Penguin Shakespeare series.

And if you haven’t added Weston’s site to your RSS feeds yet, now would be a good time to do so.

Writing workflows

Tech Life

Reading Viticci’s My Dropbox Writing Workflow has been, admittedly, a fun ride. Whatever it is you do, you should always treat your workflow seriously, and by perfecting it you become, if not more productive, at least a bit more efficient. If you take the time to read how Viticci has organised his writing workflow, I’m sure you’ll admire his organisation. Everyone has their methods, and I believe it’s silly to criticise other people’s ways of getting things done only because they’re different from ours. That said, I am a writer too, I too believe in synchronised writing, but my writing workflow approach is very different. It starts exactly from Viticci’s conclusion:

In thinking about a proper conclusion for this post, it occurred to me that the best way to sum up the possibilities offered by Dropbox to writers and note-takers is this: with just a folder, you can fine-tune your workflow using the apps you prefer. It’s a liberating effect: the text is there, and it will be there no matter how many apps you try or how much you tinker. Ultimately, it just comes down to writing.

Fewer tools, more writing

One of the things I love most about being a writer is that writing isn’t a particularly demanding task, tool-wise. You can achieve the most complex and beautiful results — a novel of Stephensonian magnitude, a research paper, a scientific essay — with very simple tools, starting with pen & paper. Using a computer is, of course, more practical nowadays, because it lets you manage your documents with great ease and convenience. And now that everyone is loving the cloud, being able to access your writings from anywhere is indeed desirable. If you don’t write from a single workstation all the time, it’s quite handy to start writing on one machine, continue on a second device, and finish a piece on yet another computer or device, all without losing time to retrieve a file, and most importantly without losing styles or formatting. 

The number of writing tools has been increasing lately, for Mac OS X and especially for iOS. The latest trend is dominated by so-called ‘distraction-free’ applications such as WriteRoom, Byword, OmmWriter, iA Writer. They’re all excellent tools, don’t get me wrong, but writers are not photographers. A photographer may need a certain type of camera or tool to obtain a particular effect. A writer’s final product is essentially ‘tool-independent’. That’s why I think it’s better to obsess about writing than it is to obsess about writing tools. When I hear other colleagues saying that they feel ‘more inspired’ by using tool x instead of tool y, I just can’t keep a straight face.

But yes, organisation is important, and developing techniques and strategies that help a writer to be more organised and efficient is advisable. I know, because during my most prolific years I was also a lousy organiser of my stuff, and now that I’m rebuilding my past archives I can see the mistakes I made.

My writing workflow

I don’t write on a single machine, so I rely on a couple of syncing services: Dropbox for documents, Simplenote for notes. I use different Macs for work and for writing, but the four main machines I need to keep synchronised for my writing are:

  1. MacBook Pro 15″ (mid-2009)
  2. PowerBook G4 12″
  3. Power Mac G4 Cube
  4. Clamshell iBook G3/466

Since most of these machines are vintage, I use tools that will work on all four of them without problems. That’s why I use TextEdit for my word processing needs, and BBEdit/TextWrangler as main text editor. All the documents I need to sync are saved in a Dropbox folder. Notes, quick drafts, useful bits I need to access all the time on all machines are kept in Notational Velocity, which works perfectly (and syncs via Simplenote) even on older Macs running Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger. Naturally, I routinely backup the contents of the Documents folder in Dropbox and keep a local copy on all my Macs. I also use Notational Velocity as a cross-machine clipboard.

That’s it, it couldn’t be simpler. I still don’t have an iPad, and since I plan to purchase one soon, I will probably have to take into account this new device. I’ll see how much I actually write on the iPad, and I’ll choose a writing tool accordingly, but always in the spirit of keeping things simple.