→ Saying Goodbye to Apple, Google and Microsoft

Briefly

I started reading Why I’m Saying Goodbye to Apple, Google and Microsoft by Dan Gillmor on Medium because it was the suggested reading at the bottom of another, great article you should check out: The Last of the Typewriter Men. I started reading Gillmor’s article not because I just click on whatever recommended reading I encounter, but because I was genuinely curious about Gillmor’s point of view, what brought him to that decision, and which tools he ended up choosing as an alternative. 

Gillmor writes:

More important, I’ve moved to these alternative platforms because I’ve changed my mind about the politics of technology. I now believe it’s essential to embed my instincts and values, to a greater and greater extent, in the technology I use.

Those values start with a basic notion: We are losing control over the tools that once promised equal opportunity in speech and innovation—and this has to stop.

Control is moving back to the center, where powerful companies and governments are creating choke points. They are using those choke points to destroy our privacy, limit our freedom of expression, and lock down culture and commerce. Too often, we give them our permission—trading liberty for convenience—but a lot of this is being done without our knowledge, much less permission.

And I’m totally with him on this.

Later on, about why he changed his mind about supporting Apple:

In Steve Jobs’s eras as CEO, Apple reflected his character and qualities. That was thrilling in most ways, because he demanded something close to perfection. But then the underdog revolutionized mobile computing and became the winner — one day we all realized it was one of the planet’s most powerful, profitable and valuable companies. Apple became the kind of company I prefer not to support: control-freakish to a fault with customers, software developers and the press; and, I came to believe, even dangerous to the future of open networks and user-controlled technology.

He later uses again the word ‘control-freakery’ about Apple as a reason why, when it came to choose a phone, he preferred an Android device (with Cyanogenmod) over an iPhone. And then, talking about Google, among other things, he writes this (emphasis mine):

But Google’s power and influence worry me, too, even though I still trust it more than many other tech companies.

I just don’t understand this position. (And while it seems I’m taking these words out of context, it’s actually the context that makes Gillmor’s stance even more puzzling to me, because he does recognise Google’s flaws and bad behaviour: “the company has made surveillance utterly integral to the use of its software”). 

One of Apple’s traits may be this ‘control-freakery’ Gillmor mentions, but the fact is that Apple did not become ‘control-freakish’ after the huge success of the iPhone — the ‘control-freakery’ started with Jobs, for whom Gillmor shows appreciation. And yes, perhaps Apple’s excessive control has created the ‘walled garden’ effect when it comes to applications and App Stores, but the bright side of it is that it has led to a generally superior quality in third-party app offerings and in the virtual lack of malware. Apple may have made the occasional faux pas when it comes to app rejections, but I believe that what’s behind this obsessive control for the user experience is largely Apple’s care for its customers; the intention has always been to provide the best tools and the best experience. It hasn’t always worked, granted, but I’ve never ascribed Apple’s behaviour in this regard to malice, nor have I suspected a different agenda or ulterior motives.

I don’t know how Gillmor can still trust Google more than many other tech companies — Apple included, I guess — when Google can practically track everything we do online, and Apple has demonstrated it truly cares about customer privacy (Apple can’t decrypt messages you exchange with iMessage, nor FaceTime sessions, for instance) and that it’s clearly not interested in data mining. This for me is enough to trust Apple more than Google and other big tech companies.

Lucas Bale has interviewed me about Low Fidelity and my writing

Et Cetera

Welcome to Arslan banner

 

Shortly after I was interviewed by Alex Roddie back in October 2014 about my serialised sci-fi novel Low Fidelity, I was contacted by another writer, Lucas Bale, who asked if he could conduct an extended interview with me via email about my novel and my writing in general. I was happy to oblige, but it took me an inordinate amount of time to respond. Finally, last month I completed my answers to Lucas’s questions and you can read the full interview on his website. I’m extremely grateful to Lucas for his interest and support. The feeling is mutual. 

Low Fidelity is an innovative, curiosity-engaging and untraditional format for a science fiction serial. It is currently available only on Vantage Point, Riccardo Mori’s compact digital magazine in Apple’s Newsstand. He publishes two issues per month. A monthly subscription costs $2.99. You can subscribe here (The first demo issue is free.)

Some useful links:


Please take some time to explore Lucas Bale’s site, get to know him and check out his books if you love science fiction. If you’re not familiar with his work, perhaps the upcoming anthology No Way Home, set to be released on March 2, is a good starting point (see also this page). Here you can read short speculative fiction stories by Bale and other authors, all with the common theme of being lost, stranded, blocked in places from where there’s no escape, no way to return home. I’ve been graciously handed a pre-release copy and I’m enjoying it so far.

Lucas Bale’s books in his Beyond the Wall series (“an epic, hard science-fiction space opera about the future of humanity and the discovery of the truth of its past”): 

Designing the Moment Case

Briefly

Moment Case

The team behind the great Moment Lenses is back on Kickstarter for the funding of their latest product, the Moment Case. At the time of writing, the project is well beyond the original $100,000 goal and has pledged almost $520,000 with still eight days to go. I’m not surprised: the Moment Case looks fantastic, and I think its quality and good design are immediately apparent. The Kickstarter page for the project explains the various features of the Moment Case, and the design/engineering process in detail, but if you want to have an even deeper look at the long design research and process from the very first stages to the finished prototypes, don’t miss Designing The Moment Case: The Good, the Bad, and the Work Most People Don’t Show on Core77, written by Erik Hedberg from the Moment team. This accessory deserves to be backed if only for the meticulous approach and hard work this small team has carried out over months.

A few favourite quotes:

With this project we stumbled on a few insights we never would have prioritized without doing this work:

  • Speed is all that matters with mobile. Despite people’s ability level, taking a great picture quickly was more important than anything else.
  • People get tired of digging into their pocket to find their phone. We found this action loses the nostalgia of taking pictures.
  • Without adventure, most people don’t have the creative ability to take great pictures. Every time the scenery and subject were new, people took better pictures.

 

We’ve never designed a phone case before. When we started looking into doing one, we realized that people take tons of pictures with their phones, but they don’t think of them as cameras — they think of them as phones. We love the vintage quality and novelty of traditional cameras, and wanted to pay homage to that. We wanted to recreate that pride people take in wearing a beautiful Leica around their neck. So we set out to make a case that turns your phone into a camera.

 

The design process is a beautiful thing because it’s never the same for every project. It’s actually quite similar to riding down a mountain or surfing a wave. You start out knowing what you want to do, but once you get riding you might hit a bump, you might suddenly change direction, or you might even make the best turn of your life and become enlightened for a small second. You also eat shit sometimes. When that happens you have to learn from it, get back up and try again.

Why I’m sticking with the old Flickr Uploadr

Software

I’ve been on Flickr since October 2005, and I’ve typically used my Flickr account as a way to showcase: a) what I consider some of my best efforts, b) specific photography projects — like Little Light Left, Inception: architectural visions, and 1:60 — and c) geeky photo albums to document something in particular, like IBM WorkPad, The return of the 5.25″, Carry on or Cameras. Over the course of these past ten years (!) I’ve used Flickr constantly but I’ve never ‘mass-uploaded’ entire batches of photos and I tend to not follow other Flickr members who do so. I prefer selection. Since the start, I’ve also tried to be meticulous, and that’s why for me uploading two or three photos isn’t a casual or a quick 1‑click task. It takes some time, as I want to enter tags, a proper title (and sometimes description), and the photos have to be filed in one of more albums and uploaded to the relevant groups I’m subscribed to.

I’ve always found the uploading experience to be lacking, no matter the tool, whether it was the Flickr’s Web interface or third-party applications. One exception was possibly 1001, a nice application by Adriaan Tijsseling, but development has ceased a while ago. In recent years I’ve come to rely on the first-party client Flickr Uploadr, which, while not having a particularly attractive UI, has been doing the job.

Old Flickr Uploadr

As you can see, it’s easy to add one or more photos, enter the necessary information, and upload. A couple of things I would have added, functionally, were auto-completing tags based on the tags you had already entered in the past, and the possibility to upload the photos to the Flickr groups you’re subscribed to.

As I said, not a fancy application, but useful and quite compatible with my kind of workflow.

Meanwhile, the Upload page of Flickr’s Web interface has got better since the latest site redesign has sedimented. I’ve been using it more frequently in the past months — it’s reliable, it offers tag auto-completion, it lets me upload to groups, and it’s generally what the Flickr Uploadr app should be.

The new beta Uploadr

A few days ago, exactly by visiting the Flickr Upload page on the Web, I noticed the suggestion to download the new Flickr Uploadr app. Since the previous version (judging by the file info pane in the Finder) was last updated in 2009, I downloaded the new one eagerly, expecting the kind of improvements displayed on the Web interface. I installed the app in the Applications folder (as the disk image itself suggests when you open it) and that meant of course overwriting the old version. And when I launched the new Uploadr, I almost immediately regretted installing it.

New Uploadr 1

First bad sign: “Upload automatically”. I said to myself, Of course I imagine I’ll still be able to select the photos I want to upload, and do whatever the old version let me do.

New Uploadr 2

…And this second screen gave me hope: “On the next screens, you can choose what to upload.”

But apparently, my choices are limited to folders of photos:

New Uploadr 3

No, I don’t want the Uploadr to automatically upload photos I may add to these places. I usually save screenshots on the Desktop, and I take a lot of screenshots, so no, unchecked. Same for the other folders: I can’t have this app upload whatever I put there. I still hope that the next screen…

New Uploadr 4

Upload my iPhoto library,” really? Everything? No fine-grained options? But I don’t use iPhoto anyway, so I uncheck the option and still hope that the next screen will take me to an interface where I can select the photos I want to upload.

New Uploadr 5

Tough luck. There’s nothing here. Everything is supposed to be automatic. The new Flickr Uploadr has become a mass uploader. But I decide to play along, for the sake of experimentation, and create a Flickr Up test folder. I want to see if everything is really automatic, or if I still have the possibility to perform edits and add information to the photos I place in the folder.

New Uploadr 6

 

New Uploadr 7

But no, the photo is uploaded right away. No information is added to the photo, and once I visit my Flickr page, the Photo Title field is auto-filled like this (surely a bug):

Thanks Flickr Uploadr!

Even worse, the Uploadr has automatically created a Flickr Up test album with the title of the folder I created for this test.

Sticking with the old version

Perhaps I’m not a typical Flickr user or I don’t belong to the current target audience, but my first impression of this experience is, How can people be okay with this type of automation? Uploading from the iOS app isn’t the greatest experience either, but at least it’s more thoughtful — you have the opportunity to give a title to your photo, do some basic editing, share it, geotag it and file it into one or more albums. In the new Flickr Uploadr the only level of control you have is selecting source folders of photos, and that’s it. This new version of the Mac client is significantly dumbed down, in my opinion, and it seems to be aimed at people who either love to flood their photostreams with dozens of photos at once or use their Flickr account essentially as a backup and don’t really care about showing their photos in a meaningful way. 

I have recovered the old Flickr Uploadr from a previous Time Machine backup and will keep using it until it works. If you’ve been using it the way that I do and have a similar upload workflow as mine, I suggest you avoid ‘upgrading’ to the new Uploadr and wait — maybe new features and more fine-grained options will be added in the future. I believe you can even keep the two versions together in the Applications folder — to write this article and take screenshots I kept the two apps by renaming the older version Flickr Uploadr 2009.app — so you can experiment and maybe have the best of both worlds, so to speak. As for me, I have already deleted the new version.

iPad, text editors, workflows, and a frustrated digression on simplicity

Tech Life

I have greatly enjoyed Federico Viticci’s iPad Air 2 Review: Why the iPad Became My Main Computer and I really think it’s required reading for those who still doubt the power of the iPad as a portable computer.

As I was reading his article, I stopped and thought: what Federico and I do is not that different. I’m a writer (and I’m not into podcasting, so I don’t even share that kind of workflow and don’t need podcasting hardware and software), I do a decent amount of photo-editing, I read a lot, I manage email, I take a lot of notes, I’m on Twitter and App.net, I have my selection of RSS feeds to follow… you get the picture. I stopped and thought: then why isn’t the iPad my main computer as well? Why can’t I go iPad-only, too?

I ‘get’ the iPad, I love using my good old third-generation model, and I really agree with Viticci’s conclusions — the iPad can be an empowering and liberating device. So what’s wrong in my case? What is it that doesn’t work?

A certain workflow fragmentation perhaps (and my workflows are nowhere as complex as Federico’s!), and the need to have an eye on multiple open windows and files, especially when I’m writing fiction. 

Speaking of writing, here’s a recent anecdote. I’m in my home office, sitting at my MacBook Pro in desktop configuration, writing an episode of my novel, Low Fidelity (more information: here and here). When I’m writing fiction, my preferred tool is TextEdit, I write in rich text format, all my files are RTF. Nothing fancy, but I need to see the formatting. I need to see the parts in italics, bold, in smaller font size, that sort of thing. I can’t write fiction in Markdown or HTML like I do when I’m writing articles to be published online or on my Vantage Point magazine.

My upstairs neighbours have been doing renovations for a while now, and in the late morning they start making noises that prevent me from concentrating, so these days I’m practically forced to continue my work somewhere else. I don’t feel like disconnecting everything to bring the MacBook Pro with me. Nor do I feel like taking one of my PowerBooks. I want to travel light, so I take a small backpack, put the iPad 3 and the Incase Origami Workstation inside, then a few pens and notebooks, and I’m off to the library. Of course, I’ve saved my work in a dedicated Dropbox folder, so I’ll be able to easily resume writing from the iPad.

Once arrived, I set up the Origami Workstation, wake the iPad, and from there — at least theoretically — it’s just a matter of picking a text editor among the few I’ve purchased and— oh wait… None of them will handle my RTF files saved with TextEdit. Not Phraseology, not iA Writer, not Daedalus Touch (my favourite of the bunch), not WriteRight… Then there are apps like UX Write and GoodReader which at least let me read the RTF files I need, but to actually continue my work right where I left it, I have to copy what I wrote, paste it into a new text document (say, in Daedalus Touch) in the same Dropbox folder, and take it from there. And write in plain text, or Markdown, which may be fine with you, but it’s hugely annoying for me.

Sure, if I had to work on the iPad only, or if my setup were iPad-first, Mac as a secondary device, instead of the other way round, my approach would probably be different, and I would perhaps choose my tools more carefully. Still, I would need to use a pleasant application that lets me write in rich text format directly (no, I don’t want to write in Markdown and check the preview all the time). When I publicly expressed my frustration, some suggested I use Microsoft Word for the iPad, or Apple’s Pages both on the Mac and the iPad. These solutions, however, strike me as a bit overkill for my needs, and frankly it’s also a bit silly that I have to compromise and resort to tools I don’t like using just because they do the job (I also don’t want to use iCloud for syncing — it’s a long story that I’ll leave for another article, maybe). I did that back in the 1990s and I hated it.

It looks like I’m whining, but bear with me. I’m not saying that the iPad is at fault here, because it’s not. I’m not saying there’s a shortage of iOS text editors, because there is not. The iPad and my frustration in having to change my workflow on the fly because of an unexpected snag are just triggers that have led me to another, deeper frustration — that despite all the talking about simplifying things, about solutions to eliminate friction, technology is still a complicated affair. And in a few places, unnecessarily so.

One of the problems is that apparently we can’t agree on what simplicity is or should be. Let’s stick to iOS text editors. My idea of simplicity, as one who has used computers for writing for about thirty years, is that today we should be able to write using a completely WYSIWYG (What You See Is What You Get) interface. Rich text format shouldn’t be a problem given the hardware capabilities of today’s machines. Instead we have to deal with ‘code’ and plain text as if we were still using WordStar under DOS. I have nothing against Markdown per se, but I’m starting to get tired of this minimalist trend in writing tools, sadly endorsed by more than a few tech-savvy writers. Simplicity here, for me, is clicking/tapping a button and seeing the text in bold right away, or in italics, or neatly organised in a bulleted/numbered list. Not using asterisks *for emphasis* or hash signs for #different ##headings ###etcetera. My point is, it’s 2015, and we shouldn’t be resorting to solutions like Markdown to maintain formatting across tools and platforms — we should be using formatted text everywhere effortlessly, in a WYSIWYG way.

If you take a look at the afore-linked list of iOS text editors, carefully compiled by Brett Terpstra, you’ll see that of all those apps (107 at the time of writing, the list was last updated on December 12, 2014), only one can both create/edit and export RTF documents — Textilus. Then there are Daedalus Touch and Wisdom Writer, which can only export to RTF, and Knowtes which can open RTF files in external apps. That’s it.

Yes, dear pedant nerd reader, I know that RTF is a proprietary format developed by Microsoft, and that I’m throwing ‘RTF’, ‘Rich text’ and ‘formatted text’ in the same cauldron. What I’m saying is that today, with text, the idea of simplicity is that we use markup languages for formatting — while my idea of simplicity is that, by now, we should have all the necessary technology (and plenty more) to just be free to use formatted text directly, everywhere. We should not approach writing as if we are inputting code or instructions. This idea of simplicity is for engineers and programmers.

I’m reminded of what Donald Norman says in The Design of Everyday Things:

Designers often think of themselves as typical users. After all, they are people too, and they are often users of their own designs. Why don’t they have the same problems as the rest of us? The designers I have spoken with are thoughtful, concerned people. They do want to do things properly. Why, then, are so many failing? […]

There is a big difference between the expertise required to be a designer and that required to be a user. In their work, designers often become expert with the device they are designing. Users are often expert at the task they are trying to perform with the device. […]

Designers have become so proficient with the product that they can no longer perceive or understand the areas that are apt to cause difficulties.

With simplicity in technology, we’re following similar lines. The simplicity users need or expect in their interaction with today’s devices is often different from the simplicity offered by hardware and software makers. When the two coincide, the result is a great user experience. But when that doesn’t happen, then we have frustration, workflows broken by the stupidest details or quirks, difficulty in using potentially flexible and empowering devices — such as the iPad — with maximum efficacy.

To conclude, and to return back to the beginning of this piece, what Federico Viticci has achieved — using the iPad as his sole computing device — today should be a simple process, and more people should be able to do the same. But it’s still a road uphill. It takes time and determination. It takes patience. Federico is a power user, and has got to where he is with his iPad by constantly refining his workflows and methods, by constantly researching apps and solutions, by trying different approaches to optimise the process. A lot of regular users I know (and I bet you know your share too) aren’t willing to go down that road. They perhaps want a certain simplicity and a certain fluidity and integration in carrying out tasks with their iPads that gets complicated or thwarted by the fragmentation of the There’s an app for every little thing model. 

For people like Federico, having all these little blocks at one’s disposal is the opportunity to create rich and efficient constructions (workflows). Other people, instead, get confused and bewildered by all the little blocks and stick to a few of them that are immediately useful and familiar, keeping tasks and activities separated, and generally ending up using an iPad at half of its potential. I have a friend who realised exactly that problem in how he uses his iPad, and told me what he thought was the cause: “I mistook the device’s intuitiveness for simplicity” and added, “Simplicity should scale better.” 

And thus ends this rather meandering piece.