Being known for our non-traditional ideas, my agency’s annual holiday card is expected to be much more than a piece of paper and a photo. With “green thinking” being the latest craze, this year’s card is actually not a card at all— it’s a screensaver. The Renegade Greensaver, to be exact. The Greensaver serves up eco-friendly tips. It’s connected to the Internet and will display fresh user-generated tips to you on a regular basis.
With a “do as I say, not as I do” mentality, try to ignore the hypocrisy of getting conservation tips from an energy guzzling machine and download the Greensaver here. It’s available for both Mac and PC, so you have no excuse not to check it out.
If you live in New York City or are planning a visit, check out last year’s card— I Saw NY. The website uses Google Maps technology to plot user-submitted reviews and tips on New York’s best restaurants, bars, shopping and everything in between. Anyone can contribute, so share your favorite watering hole or sushi place with the world. Don’t have one or want to find a new one? You’re in luck, users have already submitted everything from where to see a guy play a saw as an instrument to a store that sells superhero equipment.
I was responsible for the front-end programming on both of these projects. As always, your questions and comments are encouraged.
I recently launched a site redesign for Kelly Architects, an interior architectural design studio based in Los Angeles. All of the design / development work was painstakingly done by yours truly and is solely responsible for the complete lack of recent posts.
I’d like to say I’ll have more time to write in the near future, but I am jumping directly into my next project — a Facebook application for my friends over at mental_floss called “Spot the Big Fat Lie”.
As is the case with any much anticipated release date, the usual crowds of excited fanboys and eBay vultures have converged on Apple stores around the country for the release of the Apple iPhone. Since every nuance of Apple’s latest offering to the tech world has been covered in nauseating detail for the past few months, I’ll spare you my own opinion on the topic. Instead, I offer you a hilarious video of the consequences of being a greedy idiot.
I think it’s fair to say that this woman’s business prowess wasn’t bankrolling today’s $100,000 trip to the Apple store. The only regret I have is not being able to see the smug arrogance washed from her face when she was informed of the one phone per customer policy. I have no doubt that every other person in line was well aware of this policy and was making every attempt to contain their laughter over this woman’s $800 mistake.
‘Street View’ mode is the latest addition to Google Maps impressively robust list of features. To make Street View possible, the Google team literally drove a van all over Manhattan and its surrounding boroughs, taking 360 degree panoramic pictures all along the way. Since most people commute around NYC either by public transportation or walking, being able to make your commute virtually before you make it physically is an incredibly valuable resource.
While previous versions of Google’s mapping technology gave you directions to your destination along with a bird’s eye view of the area, it was devoid of the real world context that makes finding locations easier. When you get directions to a friend’s house, the address is usually accompanied by a physical description such as “it’s the white house with all the lawn flamingos.” Being able to visualize your destination makes a huge difference, especially considering that finding a building address is increasingly difficult in commercial areas.
Telling someone my office is located at 75 Ninth Avenue allows them to easily find the general area, but finding the specific building is still very difficult (as I found out when I came here for my interview). Wouldn’t it be easier to just look at a picture? Now, when you approach that general area, you have some familiar sights to guide you. We all know people who don’t work well with specific directions. If you tell them to head north 2 blocks and make a right on 24th street, they will inevitably end up lost. But, advising them to make that same turn at the deli with the red awning and including a picture of the corner will increase their probability of finding their destination.
I am obviously very impressed and excited about the possibilities of Street View. How will people use this tool and what cities are next in line to be mapped? Any thoughts?
UPDATE: I’m famous! I was looking around my neighborhood and found myself crossing the street on my way to the subway. I wasn’t positive until I zoomed in and saw my gold striped Pumas. Google, I think you owe me some likeness royalties.
Flash guru Broman and I have once again defied the odds and met our seemingly impossible three week deadline. After countless sleepless nights and with the aid of a bottomless cup of coffee, Panasonic Share the Air 2007 is now live!
“Share the Air” is a viral extension of Panasonic’s Action Sports Tour, which tours five U.S. cities this summer. The website offers extreme sport enthusiasts the chance to submit pictures and videos of their own sessions to be judged by professional skaters and photographers. Winning submissions bank a hefty cash prize and some cool Panasonic gear— so get filming!
As of today, when the 200 million users of Google Earth log onto the site, they will be able to view the horrific details of what’s happening in Darfur for themselves.
In an effort to bring more attention to the ongoing crisis in Darfur, the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum has teamed up with Google’s mapping service literally to map out the carnage in the Darfur region.
Experts estimate that 200,000 people have been killed and 2.5 million more have been displaced since the conflict flared in 2003, when rebels took up arms against the central Sudanese government.
The new initiative, called “Crisis in Darfur,” enables Google Earth users to visualize the details in the region, including the destruction of villages and the location of displaced persons in refugee camps.
Once again Google has impressed me with their ability to leverage technology in a positive and thought-provoking way. Having compiled one of the most extensive (and feared) databases of personal information on the planet, I am glad to see that Google is using it’s unprecedented information-gathering powers for good when most people perceive them simply as tools of evil.
To me, visualizing data is the only effective way to truly realize the significance and magnitude of a number. I found it interesting that this was a collaborative effort between Google and the National Holocaust Museum in Washington D.C. because the most powerful example of data visualization that I have ever seen in my life was at that very museum.
Obviously the mass genocide of the Jews during World War II was an atrocity of epic proportions, but the amount of people who were killed is somewhat incomprehensible as a number alone. People do not differentiate between numbers once they reach a large enough size. The difference between a million and a billion is nothing more than a few extra zeros if it’s not put into the proper perspective— which is where the real power of data visualization lies. As you walk through the museum you eventually come to a room that is full nothing but shoes. Thousands of pairs, each representing a life lost. Once you consider how many people it would take to fill all of those shoes you start to put that huge number into perspective. It becomes human.
As shocking as that exhibit may be, it can only affect those who actually make the trip to the museum to experience it firsthand. The reason the Darfur initiative is particularly powerful is that the message has been seamlessly integrated with existing and well-known technology, allowing for a significantly higher penetration rate. People are so preoccupied with concerns about privacy and spying that we fail to realize how powerful all of the information we have can really be. Instead of trying to keep everything a secret we should be open to what this information revolution can teach us about ourselves.
Copy and paste the following search query into Google, replacing “BAND NAME” with, you guessed it, a band name. The search will return open indexes that contain downloadable music files matching your search criteria. Try it out for yourself.
Having always been a supporter of the Sony brand, it has been disappointing to watch it crash and burn over the past year due to the turmoil surrounding their latest offering to the gaming world— the PlayStation 3. This video, to the tune of The Fray’s “How to Save a Life,” points out some of the more obvious ways Sony killed its own brand. Granted Wii, PS3 and 360 all rhyme, this is still an awesomely creative song.
The gaming industry has changed drastically in recent years, and Sony has either overlooked or ignored this fact. When Microsoft entered the market with the Xbox in 2001, it changed the the dynamics of the industry as we once knew it. Strong brands such as Nintendo and Sony could no longer depend on platform loyalties like they had in the past. They needed to differentiate through innovation instead of simply making cosmetic improvements to past products.
Nintendo obviously got the hint— releasing the remarkably successful and innovative Wii. Microsoft found a niche with their online community, Xbox Live— enabling casual gamers like me to verbally berate 12-year-olds of superior skill. This is an obvious attempt to compensate for my inability to adapt to today’s overly complicated game play, but satisfying nonetheless. Sony, on the other hand, thought that the strength of it’s PlayStation brand would be enough for it to survive the platform wars. When Wii sales proved it wasn’t just a novelty and online communities revolutionized gaming, Sony was left reeling.
So what was the PS3’s fatal flaw? It’s simple— it was late, expensive and incompatible. When it was announced in spring of 2005, it had the opportunity to drive a stake through the heart of Nintendo by beating them to market with this next generation system. Nintendo effectively stole the PS3’s thunder by releasing the cheaper, more innovative Wii while Sony was still struggling with manufacturing delays. Cost was another major flaw. While the $600 price tag is actually quite reasonable for the amount of technology packed into this system, it makes it inaccessible to a majority of its target audience.
Ignoring the needs of the consumer was Sony’s most fatal flaw. Giving the consumer the option to buy these features on an à la carte basis, like the Xbox 360’s HD-DVD drive, would have made a tremendous difference. Forcing Blu-ray down our throats in an attempt to use influence to win the format wars was not well received. Ignoring gamers demand for online communities was just stupid. When the consumer is clear in what it wants, why wouldn’t you listen?
With all of this said, what is Sony’s only hope? That the PS3 spontaneously combusts like their batteries, destroying all evidence of this colossal mistake.
For over a decade the Starbucks franchise has been spreading like a virus throughout the world, with new chains popping up daily. If you live in New York City, a Starbucks is no more than a block or two away, regardless of your location. In fact, my office is within 5 miles of 197 stores. (Yes, you read that correctly)
Aside from serving overpriced coffee, Starbucks now offers a wireless internet service through a partnership with T-Mobile. This service, which is used by many on-the-go New Yorkers, is offered for the not-so-nominal cost of $10 a day. Leave it to Starbucks to find an industry, severely overprice its product/service and still have people running back for more. I can’t understand stand it and I won’t support it. But, I would be more than happy to profit from it.
It is for these reasons that I would like to introduce you to FON. FON is offering a free router to anyone who lives within range of a Starbucks Wi-Fi signal. The idea is that you would use this router to share your broadband connection with Starbucks customers, or anyone in the area for that matter. While Starbucks is charging their customers $10 a day for their service, you can offer yours for a much more reasonable $2 a day. Of that $2, you collect $1 per user for your troubles. What an opportunity!
If $1 isn’t incentive enough, think of the feeling of satisfaction that comes with undercutting a faceless corporation! Although, that feeling will undoubtedly vanish when you spend your earnings on your morning latte. Damn this addiction!
I would like to start by thanking Charles for presenting this video at our companies weekly creative meeting. Not only is this an effective visualization of the transition from Web 1.0 to Web 2.0, but one that offers a stunning insight into how Web 2.0 is affecting and changing our lives as we know them.
To many people, Web 2.0 is a term used to describe the fancy gradients and glassy buttons that have become so common in recent web design. Others will make reference to the emergence of user-generated content, blogs, wikis and social networking. Indeed, these are all byproducts of the Web 2.0 movement. However, the most profound affects have only begun to emerge. As the video describes, the most important distinction between these web “versions” is the separation of form from content. By separating the visual aesthetic from the content itself, we have hidden the complexity of the technology at the heart of the internet. This has opened the doors of online content creation to even the least tech savvy people, allowing virtual content to be the voice of the entire population rather than a select few. Web 2.0 is a movement that marks the beginning of an entirely new way of thinking and a new way of living. We are currently experiencing a technological and cultural shift that is unprecedented. Think about the world as you knew it a decade ago. It’s gone. Our lives have become automated, at times to a fault.
Google has emerged from the depths of Silicon Valley and streamlined all of our day-to-day activities, relieving us of any responsibility to search for answers or solutions unaided. MySpace has created virtual identities and communities for millions of people to use and abuse. Wikipedia has channeled the flow of information around scholars and first-hand sources and allowed it to intersect with the average person. YouTube has opened the door to 15 minutes of fame for aspiring directors, actors, musicians and absolute idiots. Everyone has now been given the means to be seen and be heard, but, more importantly, the means to be heard but not seen.
This is both fantastic and terrifying.
As we enter the virtual world we are shedding our real world identity in favor of utter ambiguity. We are now pure content, our true inner selves freed from the restraints imposed by our outer framework. With the ability to spread across a variety of forms with complete anonymity. As creators of virtual content we choose what and how much of ourselves is reveled to our virtual colleagues. We choose what we teach the machine and this lesson is by no means uncalculated. Anyone can visually observe the events of my life by perusing my Flickr account, but not even know my name. Conversely, somebody could read this blog and know many of my inner thoughts and opinions without having any context to base an assumption of my physical appearance. Obviously I have just made that connection for you, but that is a choice based on my comfort level with this medium. Some people openly embrace it while others shudder in fear of it. I would probably shake its hand.
At the beginning of the information revolution, back in Web 1.0, we were attempting to make a distinct separation of our real selves from our virtual ones. Now that we are beginning to grow tired of the ambiguity we once thrived on, we again crave the real-life interactions and connections we once had. Enter Web 2.0. For the most part, these virtual connections have not made the transition back to reality to complete the circle. As a result, we are beginning to see a change in the way that we handle our daily lives — opting for an automated solution in lieu of our traditional ones.
Why go to a bar to meet someone when you can go to Match.com?
When a society starts thinking like that, it becomes screamingly obvious that we are no longer looking for an enhancement to our daily lives, but a replacement. A step over the line dividing real life, tangible experiences from virtual ones is a step in the wrong direction. But what will happen if we cross that line, you ask? Web 3.0, I presume.
