On modern productivity

Tech Life

An anecdote

Spring 1989, Senior high school, Technical drawing class. Usually we had two consecutive hours on Saturday mornings, but that Saturday both the Math and English language professors were indisposed, so the headmaster asked our Art History & Technical Drawing professor if she was willing to extend her class to four hours. She agreed, and most of my schoolmates were happy, because she was the nicest professor, and her classes were always interesting and fun to attend. Her plan for the unexpected prolonged morning with my class was to split us in five groups of five students each, and give each group drawing-related challenges. One group, for example, had to draw a complex composition, creating all the correct shades and shadows. Another had to choose an object, like a car or a train wagon, and draw it ‘technically’, trying to recreate the blueprints for it. My group was given the photo of a house, and we had to draw its site plan.

I was chipper and excited, both because of the assignment and because the other four in my group were the smartest of the class. When you’re among people you get on well with, people who are bright, intelligent interlocutors, you just know that you’re going to create something valuable, whatever the scope of the task. However, while I got to work at once on the photo of the house, taking measurements and attempting to obtain a reliable scale of the place to start drawing the site plan, my group fellows soon started discussing about the tools. L. remarked to P. how expensive-looking his set of Rotring rapidographs was, and P. started showing L. how the different pens worked, why he thought they were the best on the market, and some techniques to draw perfect lines without ink smudges or irregularities, then S. and C. — both very good at math — exchanged tips to perform a series of calculations with some time-saving shortcuts. It was a pleasure listening to them, believe me, but I was beginning to think that, to complete the task satisfactorily, it was time to, erm, actually get to work on it.

The professor must have read my mind, because she approached our drawing desk, and after listening to what was going on, she made a remark along these lines:

Loving the tools we use is a good thing, because you work better, but they should never steal too much focus from the task at hand.

In other words, learn to love your work/what you do more than the tools you use to get it done.

Read More

Mac App Store: qualche nota a margine

Mele e appunti

È passato più di un mese dal lancio del Mac App Store. Ero tentato di esprimere qualche opinione a caldo, ma ho preferito aspettare. Adesso eccomi qui, e devo dire che gli appunti presi durante la prima settimana di vita del Mac App Store non sono cambiati granché. Metto subito le mani avanti: non è un’analisi esauriente e approfondita, ma parziale e incompleta. Sono certo che ci vorrà ancora del tempo per poter valutare come si deve l’efficacia e la praticità dello Store, ma al momento le mie impressioni si trovano in quella parte dello spettro che sta fra il negativo e il non-interessato, e sono giocoforza influenzate da come io uso il Mac, da come io acquisto e installo i programmi — insomma, dalla mia esperienza.

1. Come molte delle azioni intraprese da Apple negli ultimi tempi, il Mac App Store è stato creato in primo luogo per venire incontro agli interessi di Apple e degli utenti; gli sviluppatori in questa lista arrivano terzi e ultimi. Che il Mac App Store avvantaggi Apple non credo sia necessario spiegarlo. Per l’utente finale è un’idea interessante: il processo di acquisto e installazione diventa un gioco da ragazzi in quanto è praticamente identico a quello delle applicazioni per gli iDispositivi; l’utente ha inoltre la garanzia di non installare nulla di sospetto o dannoso per il suo Mac (per vedere il proprio software pubblicato su Mac App Store occorre seguire linee guida piuttosto rigide, forse ancor più rigide rispetto all’App Store di iOS — e come avviene per la piattaforma iOS, anche qui i programmi sono sottoposti all’approvazione del gruppo di revisori di Apple); in più ho visto che alcuni software vengono venduti nel Mac App Store a prezzi più interessanti rispetto ai canali abituali. Le applicazioni di Apple, tanto per fare un esempio.

Agli sviluppatori tocca, al solito, rimboccarsi le maniche. Il primo dilemma, per loro, è decidere se entrare o meno nello Store. Beneficio: un canale di distribuzione installato su qualsiasi Mac aggiornato a Mac OS X 10.6.6, che permette al loro software di avere maggiore visibilità e raggiungere potenzialmente più utenti. Costo: una parte dei guadagni va ad Apple, e non è detto che il gioco valga la candela. Per gli sviluppatori che entrano con successo nello Store, e continuano al tempo stesso a vendere i loro prodotti attraverso il loro sito, c’è il problema degli aggiornamenti. Se l’utente possiede, per esempio, la versione 2.5 del Software XYZ, e Software XYZ viene venduto anche nel Mac App Store, quando si apre l’applicazione App Store sul Mac quel software risulterà “Installato”, ma quando uscirà la versione 3.0 del Software XYZ, l’utente non potrà aggiornare attraverso il Mac App Store. I percorsi di update viaggiano (per ora) su binari paralleli. L’applicazione acquistata fuori dallo Store si aggiornerà fuori dallo Store (o attraverso l’ormai popolare motore di auto-aggiornamento Sparkle, ossia quella finestrella che appare quando si lancia il programma e informa che “esiste una versione aggiornata del Software, vuoi scaricarla ora?”; oppure, in certi casi, tocca aggiornare manualmente andando al sito del produttore e scaricando l’aggiornamento); l’applicazione acquistata nel Mac App Store si aggiornerà attraverso il programma App Store, che segnalerà la presenza di eventuali aggiornamenti come avviene su iPhone e iPad.

Altro problema per gli sviluppatori, almeno per il momento, è l’impossibilità di offrire versioni dimostrative dentro il Mac App Store, così come di offrire prezzi scontati per gli aggiornamenti a pagamento quando un software viene aggiornato a una versione maggiore (esempio: di solito a chi acquista la versione 3 del Software XYZ non viene fatto pagare l’aggiornamento 3.0.1, o 3.1, o 3.5, ecc., ma il rilascio della versione 4 comporta un paid upgrade, che di solito ha un prezzo pieno per chi lo acquista per la prima volta, e un prezzo scontato per i clienti fedeli che arrivano da versioni precedenti).

2. Se quanto esposto al punto 1. suona macchinoso, beh, un po’ lo è. Ed è quel che mi ha fatto storcere il naso fin dall’inizio. La mia primissima reazione è stata: “Insomma, Apple ormai viene da un’esperienza quasi triennale con l’App Store per iOS — perché non aspettare qualche mese e fornire un Mac App Store con procedure ancor più semplici per tutti?”. Non nego che il meccanismo di acquisto con un clic e di installazione di un’applicazione, attraverso il Mac App Store, sia una pacchia per quegli utenti più inesperti, ma, diamine, appena il livello di esperienza sale di un poco, non si capisce perché uno debba ricorrere a un’applicazione esterna (App Store) per aggiornarne un’altra. A un software, App Store, che installa sempre e comunque tutto nella cartella Applicazioni e sempre e comunque tutto nel Dock. Sia chiaro: la cartella Applicazioni è da sempre il luogo caldamente consigliato ove tenere i programmi sul Mac, perché spostarli in altre cartelle può generare problemi (la suite iWork, per esempio, non viene vista da Aggiornamento Software se la si muove altrove o se si rinomina la cartella in cui risiede). Se sa quel che sta facendo, un utente può sempre spostare altrove le applicazioni che installa con Mac App Store, e può toglierle dal Dock se non vuole che appaiano lì. E ripeto, sono sicuro che il sistema di installazione attraverso il Mac App Store piacerà a molti. Per me (per me) semplifica le cose per un verso e le complica per un altro.

Un esempio recente: una settimana fa è uscita finalmente la versione 4 di Twitterrific per Mac. Su Mac App Store viene venduta a 7,99 Euro, e stavo per fare clic e comprarla subito, quando mi sono ricordato di avere regolare licenza della versione 3. Ho chiuso App Store, sono andato sul sito e ho visto che si poteva comprare la versione 4 a prezzo pieno — 9,95 dollari, cioè appunto circa 7,99 Euro — oppure era disponibile un prezzo ridotto per chi aggiornava dalla versione 3: 7,95 dollari (circa 5,90 Euro). Ho quindi acquistato Twitterrific direttamente dal sito, ho risparmiato 2 Euro, e ho la certezza che quanto ho pagato finisce interamente nelle tasche dei validi programmatori di Iconfactory, che se lo meritano. Ci ho guadagnato io, e ci hanno guadagnato loro. Si è trattato di soli 2 Euro, ma come sarebbe andata con software più costosi?

3. Conclusione provvisoria: Mac App Store mi appare ancora acerbo, e spero che gli sviluppatori continuino a mantenere un doppio canale di commercializzazione dei loro prodotti, anche se è più laborioso. Mi servirò del Mac App Store per ottenere quei programmi che vengono forniti solo ed esclusivamente nel Mac App Store, per il resto continuerò a comprare software e ad aggiornarlo al di fuori di Mac App Store, perché, per come utilizzo io il Mac, la ritengo la soluzione più comoda. Ben conscio che non è così per tutti. E di tanto in tanto aprirò l’applicazione App Store, per vedere che c’è di nuovo, un po’ come faccio con l’iTunes Store.

An unexpected search tool: AppZapper

Software

I am aware that it’s not the only software in its category, but when people ask me for suggestions about utilities for uninstalling applications, my recommendation has always been AppZapper. Not only because there’s still an older version of it that works under Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, but also because, if you’re using Snow Leopard, AppZapper has a very interesting feature besides zapping your unwanted applications: a search tool menacingly called Hit List.

When opened, AppZapper’s primary interface is unassuming. Just drag the application you want to uninstall and it’ll be gone in a click.

But when you click on the switch on the upper right corner, you’ll be presented with the powerful, flexible Hit List feature.

I like the fact that it has Spotlight-like filters. You can begin to type the name of the application you’re searching for, or you can just ask AppZapper to show you, say, all applications that are bigger than 20 MB, not used in the Last Month, and have them sorted by Size. It’s really useful to have a glance at your usage patterns, in a way, because you might realise (as I did) that if you haven’t used certain programs for over 9 months, for instance, maybe they’re not that useful or essential to deserve space on your main hard drive. Yes, they might be old games you keep there for the occasional distraction (hey there Quake II), but also applications you downloaded on a whim, tried once or twice and forgot they were even there. That’s what happened to me, considering that when I bought my MacBook Pro I migrated a lot of old stuff from the 12-inch PowerBook G4.

Yes, I haven’t opened Automator in a year…

So yes, the primary function of this tool is to help you search and destroy a certain application and its whole ‘family’ of preference and library/support files, but I’m using it more and more often just to quickly find those files when I need to erase or modify them, without necessarily getting rid of a piece of software. I know where they’re located and could get to them via the Finder, but with AppZapper it’s a matter of a couple of clicks. Also, I can see at a glance whether there are related files (like caches) I may not be aware of. With AppZapper’s clean and efficient interface, it’s really a breeze.

For example, not too long ago, I was mildly annoyed by the fact that Tweetie kept showing outdated avatars of the people I followed. I used AppZapper to quickly reach Tweetie’s preference file, and thanks to its search tool I found out an interesting detail:

Things you discover during an investigation…

…which is the presence of two cache files (the ones with the clipboard icon), located in [my hard drive]/Users/[my Home folder]/Library/Caches. With a click on the small magnifying glass, I could instantly reach the two folders containing them, and delete the com.atebits.tweetie.profile-images folder, obviously after quitting Tweetie. I then reopened Tweetie and the avatar issue was solved (deleting the cache, the application was forced to re-download the most updated versions of the avatars).

It may be a silly example, but the point is that AppZapper is a fast search tool not only for a certain app’s location, but also for all its related files. How many times have you wanted to just get rid of a program’s preference file because the program was acting up, but you couldn’t find it in a timely fashion? If you’re like me, your Preferences folder inside your Home/Library folder contains thousands of files, and sometimes an application’s preference file name isn’t that easy to spot in a sea of com.xxx.yyy.plist files. Or maybe the file you need to manually edit or just examine isn’t even there but in one of the Application Support folders located in [hard drive]/Library/ or [hard drive]/Users/[username]/Library/. Or it’s a cache located in another place altogether. In these cases, I’ve found AppZapper to be the fastest search tool at hand. I’d love if Spotlight incorporated something like this, especially for reverse searches; that is: “Does the file com.mscape.iconographer.plist still have the application that originated it and other related files/caches, or not?”

t.co

Tech Life

Finally, the launch of the Mac App Store on January 6 also brought an interesting bit of news: after a long interval that was starting to feel like forever, Tweetie 2 for Mac was out, ready to be downloaded (a free app) from the Store itself. Exclusively from the Store. Good — so let’s download and install Mac OS X 10.6.6, which includes the App Store application, and let’s get Tweetie 2 (actually the app is simply called Twitter for Mac now, since Twitter acquired Atebits a while ago) and let’s keep on tweeting in that shiny new interface.

I have read a few reactions to the new Twitter for Mac’s interface and application in general, and people — at least that small sample represented by those I follow on Twitter — seem to have mixed feelings about it. A few are enthusiastic, another few have stuck with it despite some little things they don’t like; others have tried it for some days and returned to Tweetie or the Twitter client they were using before, because they were disappointed by the new application, or bewildered by changes in the interface and user interaction, or unwilling to adjust to Twitter for Mac.

Most complaints seem to be interface-related. Not mine. In fact, I really haven’t got any problem with Twitter for Mac’s interface. I don’t mind its non-standard GUI elements, I don’t mind its animations or their inconsistencies. But I haven’t switched to it yet for basically two details: the first is a ‘feature’, the second is the lack of a feature.

I’ll start with the latter. On a general note, I’m rather surprised by the lack of customisation options in Twitter for Mac. Not that Tweetie 1.2.8 preferences are chock-full of controls and settings, but at least I can change the font size, the Retweet syntax, and decide which URL shortening service I want to use to shorten any long link I might include in a tweet, and the way people’s names are displayed in the timeline (by Full Name or Twitter username). In the ‘new and improved’ Twitter for Mac these things are all missing. Particularly missing, for me, is the ability to switch to Full Name display. I want to see the names of the people I follow (or of those who follow me and send replies every now and then), not their usernames. It’s a small niggle, but enough to irk me. I prefer to read “Jason Scott” rather than “textfiles”, or “Dave Lawrence” instead of “davelawrence8”, for instance. The feature was already there in Tweetie, why drop it? Also, why force people to stick with a specific font and font size? Helvetica is a classic, but maybe for some people Lucida Grande (Mac OS X’s system font) is more readable. One should at least be given the ability to make it a little bigger. I hope that in future updates these features will be reinstated, instead of just playing at “Change The App’s Icon”. 

The second, and most important thing that has kept me from switching to Twitter for Mac is related to URL shortening. Twitter for Mac has gone all corporate and only uses the Twitter-sanctioned t.co service. If you go to t.co’s home page, you’ll read the following message:

Twitter uses the t.co domain as part of a service to protect users from harmful activity, to provide value for the developer ecosystem, and as a quality signal for surfacing relevant, interesting Tweets.

You can click the Learn more button and you’ll be taken to a Support page further explaining how the service works, etc. 

The fact is: if you use Twitter for Mac, every URL you insert in your tweets will be automatically shortened using t.co. It doesn’t matter whether your original URL was long or short to begin with; it doesn’t matter if it was an already shortened URL (perhaps copied and pasted from other well-known URL shortening services like tinyurl, bit.ly, is.gd); furthermore, it doesn’t matter if the original URL was already shortened by a recognisable company/entity using an alternate, short URL tailored for services like Twitter where every character counts (examples include amzn.com, flic.kr, nyti.ms and others). 

I find this behaviour quite annoying. I’d like to be able to recognise at a glance where a certain link comes from, or at least have a vague idea about what I can reasonably expect when someone I follow wants to share something. If I see URLs beginning with http://twitpic.com, or http://yfrog.com, I know they link to images, and since I’m still on Tweetie 1.2.8, I’ll be able to enjoy the added comfort of seeing them from within the client, without having the links passed to an external browser. Same goes for Instagram (http://instagr.am) and Flickr (http://flic.kr); in this case the link will open in a browser, but I’m expecting a photo anyway, because I recognise the source. In a way or another, such URLs, albeit shortened, give me a shred of information. t.co gives me nothing, apart from the notion that the link is ‘approved by Twitter’. From a practical, user-oriented standpoint, what t.co does is wrapping whatever URL into obscurity.

There’s more about t.co’s behaviour I dislike. If you use Twitter for Mac, as I said above, every link you put in a tweet will be given the t.co treatment, but if you access Twitter from the Web interface at twitter.com, you will see the original link. Every other Twitter client, instead, will display only the obscure t.co URL. If you’re using a Twitter client with the ability of displaying images inline, it won’t recognise images with twitpic or yfrog URLs inside t.co URLs, so it won’t display them. Another peculiar thing: if you use the Web interface and click on a URL that was posted from Twitter for Mac (and therefore subject to the ‘t.co treatment’), you will see the original URL, but when you hover the mouse on it, the browser will see the t.co URL instead (look at the URL in the browser’s status bar at the bottom), so that upon clicking the URL, the browser will first go to the t.co link, which will in turn redirect you to the original site. Absurd, redundant, and even a bit questionable if you ask me.

So, no, I’m not going to use Twitter for Mac for now. If they’re not willing to change the URL shortening behaviour, at least they should add a preference that lets me decide whether I want the URL shortened or not, instead of all this t.co ‘mass assimilation’. Yes, I’m acting on principle here. I just want more clarity and flexibility. Thankfully there are plenty of other solid Twitter clients, including the ‘old’ Tweetie (and I can’t wait to see the forthcoming Twitterrific 4 for Mac), but still, Twitter for Mac has been a bit of a disappointment for me, especially after the long wait.

iMovie ’11 e il pannello Bordato

Mele e appunti

Ovvero, l’ennesima sciocchezza nella localizzazione di un’interfaccia

Nell’immagine qui sotto potete vedere, e riconoscere, una delle novità di iMovie ‘11, cioè la finestra a pannelli necessaria per iniziare a impostare un trailer cinematografico. Il pannello in evidenza è Outline. Ora, Outline è uno dei tanti termini inglesi che possono tradursi in mille modi a seconda del contesto. Qui è evidente che la traduzione più appropriata è Schema o Struttura, visto che raccoglie tutta una serie di dati necessari al trailer.

Sapete invece come è stato localizzato? Così:

Bordato! Bordato non significa nulla qui. Outline si può tradurre Bordato quando si parla di stili di font (tondo, grassetto, corsivo, sottolineato, ombreggiato, bordato…). Evidentemente lo hanno tradotto gli stessi signori (o le stesse macchine) che hanno tradotto quest’altra perla.

Dai, Apple. Se ti serve un consulente per la localizzazione italiana io sono qui…