Power button behaviour

Briefly

Power button dialog new

Before Mac OS X 10.9 Mavericks, pressing the power button on a Mac triggered this dialog box. A very easy-to-remember shortcut for a very useful dialog box. In Mavericks, Apple changed the behaviour of the power button, in a really arbitrary fashion. From a usability standpoint, I think it’s generally a bad idea to suddenly change a shortcut that has remained unchanged for years. This power button shortcut has existed — if I remember correctly — since Mac OS 8. Long-time Mac users have it in their muscle memory. 

In Mavericks, or more specifically, in Mac OS X 10.9.0 and 10.9.1, the new behaviour works like this: tapping the power button once puts the Mac to sleep. Tapping the power button again wakes the Mac up. If you want to access the familiar Shut Down dialog box, you have to press the power button for 1.5 seconds (according to this Apple Support article, which hasn’t been updated yet). If you hold down the power button for at least 5 seconds, you’ll force the Mac to turn off.

Again, I didn’t see the practical side of this change. Some people may have found it handy, but I really think it was unnecessary. In more than one occasion I accidentally put my MacBook Pro to sleep when I was actually trying to quickly access the Restart option from that dialog box.

The recent 10.9.2 update changes the power button behaviour again. Now, if you just tap the power button, nothing happens. If you press it for a couple of seconds, you put the Mac to sleep, and if you want to access the Shut Down dialog box, you have to press Ctrl-power button. This is getting confusing and ridiculous, a textbook case of ‘Don’t fix what is not broken.’

Mail Shield

Briefly

No, it’s not a new email client for OS X or iOS. It’s something better: a future[1] company based in Switzerland providing a completely secure email service. They have launched a campaign on Indiegogo and aim to raise $45,000 by the end of April 2014.

You should follow the link and read what they’re offering in detail. Here are the bits that I’ve found essential (emphasis theirs):

We will provide you with an e‑mail address with the strongest privacy protection on the World: no one will be able to read your emails (including us), but you.

[…]

We will use servers physically placed in Switzerland and under our own direct control: no cloud computing, no outsourcing. We will only make use of open source software: no backdoors for corporations and governments.

[…]

We will employ cryptography everywhere — when receiving, sending, and storing email, as well as on our website, including e‑commerce pages and webmail.

If you want to, we will encrypt your whole mailbox. This means that no one will be able to read your emails including us.

They offer a wide range of account options, from a basic email account that’ll cost you $15/year (100MB email storage) to a $99/year Business account where you can bring your domain to Mail Shield and the company will offer infinite aliases and SMTP service, plus 1GB of email storage. There are more expensive options if you want full encryption of your mailbox. 

I personally know one of the engineers involved in this project and I can guarantee these are serious people. At the time of writing they have raised about $300. Please consider supporting Mail Shield or at least spread the word. I want this project to succeed.

 


 

  • 1. ‘Future’ because the company (MailShield SA) will be incorporated if the campaign is successful.

 

WhatsFace

Tech Life

Really, I did not want to talk about this. I always try to offer balanced points of view, and I always try to avoid being impulsive with my observations, but when it comes to Facebook I have discovered that I simply can’t do that. So, why am I writing this? Because a few people have asked me what I think about Facebook’s multi-billion-dollar acquisition of WhatsApp. And well, let’s be frank, there’s nothing to think — it’s all just disgusting to me.

If you want to learn about this Facebook-WhatsApp affair analysed under a strategic perspective, you must read Ben Thompson’s The Social Conglomerate. I mean, go read it now, because if you don’t, you won’t understand the freshest layer of hate I have for Facebook.

Marco Arment, in linking to Ben Thompson’s aforementioned piece, makes a personal remark about the whole situation. I quote him fully, because I feel exactly the same:

It’s interesting that so much coverage of the WhatsApp acquisition by Facebook has used the same word: conglomerate.

Our industry has reached a chilling point where the biggest players are so big, with so much cash, so much to lose, and effectively zero regulation, that they can simply buy anyone who threatens their dominance. 

I’ll add another little element to the mix: a few contacts and acquaintances of mine — some of them quite heavy Facebook users — have told me how appalled they are by this latest Facebook acquisition; they’ve asked me something along the lines of How can Facebook get away with things like this? Where do they find all that money!?

In part thanks to folks like you,” I replied, “who have unconditionally put your social activity in their hands. That’s how.”

One would think that, before this realisation, people like these acquaintances of mine would start reconsidering their use of Facebook. But no. There is an initial conflicted pause in their expressions, then they start mounting the ‘excuse tower.’ You know, it’s not easy quitting Facebook — my second cousin once removed is on Facebook and it’s the only way I can stay in touch with him… Or: If I delete my account, I fear I’ll stay out of the loop — all my friends use Facebook to organise outings and gatherings, blah blah blah…

You get the idea — they feel as if there were no alternatives to Facebook. They feel they’re in too deep and that there’s no easy way out. To me, their excuses sound a bit like the excuses you hear in a police drama from people who want to leave certain organised crime associations but fear for their life if they do so. If I leave the gang, I’m a dead man, you know? Also, I used to be an Apple evangelist in the 1990s, and these excuses represent, in a way, a déjà vu for me — just like when I was trying to explain to people and clients that the personal computing experience didn’t start and end with Windows and Microsoft. Many were unwilling to switch to the Mac because the majority of their contacts and acquaintances had Windows boxes (and above all, Windows software they could ‘pass’ among themselves, if you get my drift), or because using Windows software was ‘the only way’ to do something and there wasn’t as much software for the Mac, and so on and so forth.

Humour and memories aside, I know people who have been basically ostracised by their Facebook-using friends for their not being on Facebook as well. I say this is not how friends act, and if you’re not using Facebook and you found yourself in a similar situation you should have a word with such ‘friends’ before considering dropping them.

There are alternatives to Facebook, there are other ways of staying in touch with people. Those I like most are perhaps too ‘old school’ for some people’s tastes, since they involve email, phone calls, and a certain amount of ‘friction’ and dedication that some people dislike because it’s not convenient enough or tailored enough to their busy schedule, so they tend to prefer the path of least resistance and the convenience Facebook offers. Facebook knows that, and counts on that.

What Facebook is doing is creating a sort of ‘social lock-in’ around you, extending its reach by acquiring companies like Instagram and WhatsApp. You’re free to let that happen, but don’t come to me all bothered and appalled when Facebook throws billions of dollars to the next social-related company it acquires. 

I’ve always declared that “I’m not on Facebook,” and it’s not a pose. I just don’t want to be a part of Facebook’s social monopoly. I just don’t want a giant like Facebook to shape my social interactions. I don’t want to help Facebook get richer and richer in exchange of its freebies and its convenience. If Facebook buys a company whose apps or services I’m using, I stop using them (like I did with Instagram — and since I never was a WhatsApp user, no problem there). Yes, I’m acting on principle, and yes, I believe more people should follow suit. Read Ben Thompson’s excellent piece I mentioned at the beginning. Realise what Facebook is doing. And if that doesn’t leave a bitter taste in your mouth, I don’t know what to tell you.

A final aside

I am no Google fan, either. I’ve been using some of Google’s products over the years because I actually liked Google ten years ago or so. Lately, not so much. So, again acting on principle, I’m currently getting rid of quite a number of secondary Gmail accounts I’ve opened (mainly to subscribe to other services, apps, mailing lists). The difficult part in all this is to track down every third-party account I subscribed to using a particular Gmail account, and edit it to point to a different, non-Google email account. That’s why this de-Googlification process may take a while. (“And is that worth all the inconvenience?” you’ll ask. Well, sometimes acting on principles means taking the steep path uphill, but it is ultimately rewarding.) 

For my search needs, I’m using DuckDuckGo more and more often, and I think it’s a great alternative. (Read this interesting article if you want to know more about it: Inside DuckDuckGo, Google’s Tiniest, Fiercest Competitor). On Google+, my account is basically a placeholder, and when I delete my primary Gmail account, it’ll go away too.

Getting rid of these tech giants is difficult and can be inconvenient, since they’re getting progressively more pervasive and intrusive, but it’s not impossible, in my opinion.

Forcing favicon reload in ReadKit

Briefly

On my MacBook Pro, my RSS feed reader of choice is ReadKit, and I like it a lot, because of its UI similarities with Reeder for Mac, and also because of how it handles my Pinboard bookmarks (as if they were feeds, in fact). 

Like many other feed readers, ReadKit displays the site’s favicon next to each feed:

Readkit favicons

Sometimes, though, favicons may get corrupted or the site owner may update them (as I myself did with my site). It’s just a minor detail, but in such case I want the feed reader to show me the updated favicons. All feed readers usually keep a favicon cache to avoid loading them every time you launch the application. It usually resides in a folder inside [your username]/Library/Application Support/[app name]. Typically, to force the feed reader to reload all favicons, you’d delete such cache, but with ReadKit I couldn’t find anything of the sort. ReadKit doesn’t even create a preferences file in the usual [your username]/Library/Preferences folder. 

After a deeper search with the always excellent Find Any File, I found out that ReadKit stores favicons in a favicon folder inside [your username]/Library/Containers/com.webinhq.ReadKit /Data/Library/Application Support/ReadKit/ Simply delete the contents of that folder (keeping ReadKit closed), and relaunch ReadKit. All favicons will progressively reload.

App.net introduces the Comments Widget

Briefly

From the App.net blog:

We get a lot of requests to create a way to leave a comment on a web site using your App.net account. So, at the last App.net Hackathon @voidfiles decided to build the App.net Comments Widget, which does just that. […]

The App.net Comments Widget is built on top of the App.net API, and all comments are actually public posts. Conversations within the App.net Comments Widget – comments, replies, and stars — can take place on your web site, or inside an App.net client as well.

We wanted to make the App.net Comments Widget as accessible as possible, so it only requires one line of html to install on your web site. We also enabled login with Facebook, so folks can participate, even if they don’t yet have an App.net account.

This is a great idea and a straightforward implementation. One more reason to be a satisfied App.net paid user, or to join the platform if you’re not aboard already.


 

In related news, if you’re an App.net user you can subscribe to my Broadcast channel to get real-time push notifications every time I publish a new article here. I’m also testing the Subscribe via email service, which allows you to receive email notifications when a new article is published. (Check the sidebar.)

Here’s what a Broadcast email notification looks like:

Appnet email notif