Thursday, May 7, 2009
Friday, April 17, 2009
Online shopping with Web 2.0
A recent article from Yahoo's tech section, found here, talks about a new shopping website - Pixazza. Pixazza is unique when compared with all other shopping sites out there because it approaches online shopping through a web 2.0 lens. The fundamentals behind Pixazza are that various websites can link photos of clothing items to Pixazza. Then users tag the photos with links to common shopping sites such as Amazon, Overstock, or Macy's. For example, a celebrity gossip site such as "I'm Not Obsessed" will post images of shoes worn by an actress in a recent television show. Then users can tag the photo with links to the same or similar shoes at online shopping sites. The website benefits all parties involved. Websites that allow Pixazza to use photos are getting advertising and would post the photos anyway. Users that tag the photos get a commission of the sales generated through the tags.
I think that this website is the perfect example of web 2.0 and how websites are becoming more user orientated. Pixazza merges a number of different new website trends such as tagging, online shopping, and user input in order to create a new market place. I also see Pixazza as a further example of how people are beginning to re-think traditional media such as photos or news stories. Instead of merely seeing a photo of an object and then having to spend hours trying to find out who makes it. Now people can view a picture and know exactly who makes it and where to buy it by simply hovering over it with a mouse. I do not think that I will really take advantage of Pixazza from a usability standpoint because I am not a big online shopper. However, I do like that people are thinking outside the box and developing new website ideas.
I think that this website is the perfect example of web 2.0 and how websites are becoming more user orientated. Pixazza merges a number of different new website trends such as tagging, online shopping, and user input in order to create a new market place. I also see Pixazza as a further example of how people are beginning to re-think traditional media such as photos or news stories. Instead of merely seeing a photo of an object and then having to spend hours trying to find out who makes it. Now people can view a picture and know exactly who makes it and where to buy it by simply hovering over it with a mouse. I do not think that I will really take advantage of Pixazza from a usability standpoint because I am not a big online shopper. However, I do like that people are thinking outside the box and developing new website ideas.
Thursday, April 9, 2009
Full length movies on You Tube
A recent article on CNET.com talked about a deal that might be fourth coming between YouTube and Sony Pictures. With the deal Sony would give YouTube the rights to full length Sony movies but still control the advertising. In all likelihood it would probably be only a limited number of titles, but it would help Sony market its own online video streaming site, crackle.com. Although YouTube would not gain substantially from this deal monetarily, it would be a great step for them in convincing other production companies to give YouTube rights as well.
I think that this is an interesting article because it shows how technology is changing. There has been a lot of talk in the past couple years about how everything is turning digital and how newspapers will soon be obsolete. However, I think that there might be a case for arguing that even movies in DVD form will become obsolete. It seems like everyday online movies and television shows are becoming better and better quality. It also seems like more people are choosing to watch their programing online because of the flexibility it offers them to watch at their convenience. I can foresee many of the major motion picture companies starting their own subscription based websites where consumers can pay a monthly subscription and watch whatever movie they want online.
Some will say that it is still nicer to watch a movie on a television than a computer for quality purposes. Well, they may be right to some degree, but not entirely. I think that in the coming year the quality of online media will rival standard DVDs (not Blu Ray). And there will most likely be a component that will allow consumers to hook their cable modem up to their TV and watch the movies there. I still think there will be a place for HD and Blu Rays, but I think that in the coming years we will start to see fewer and fewer DVDs.
I think that this is an interesting article because it shows how technology is changing. There has been a lot of talk in the past couple years about how everything is turning digital and how newspapers will soon be obsolete. However, I think that there might be a case for arguing that even movies in DVD form will become obsolete. It seems like everyday online movies and television shows are becoming better and better quality. It also seems like more people are choosing to watch their programing online because of the flexibility it offers them to watch at their convenience. I can foresee many of the major motion picture companies starting their own subscription based websites where consumers can pay a monthly subscription and watch whatever movie they want online.
Some will say that it is still nicer to watch a movie on a television than a computer for quality purposes. Well, they may be right to some degree, but not entirely. I think that in the coming year the quality of online media will rival standard DVDs (not Blu Ray). And there will most likely be a component that will allow consumers to hook their cable modem up to their TV and watch the movies there. I still think there will be a place for HD and Blu Rays, but I think that in the coming years we will start to see fewer and fewer DVDs.
Thursday, April 2, 2009
Surfing the Internet at Work: A productive idea?
There is an interesting article here about productivity in the work place. Specifically, the article presents a study done by researchers in Australia involving workers and time spent surfing the internet. The study found that workers are 9% more productive when they are given time to sporadically surf the internet. Out of 300 workers 70% of them spent time during their work day surfing the web. In that time You Tube and Twitter were among the most popular sites.
The study found that people were more productive because they would then concentrate even more when they went back to work. It is the same principle as taking a break from intense work every 30-45 min. When a person is heavily engaged in a task they often function better when they take a break to recollect their thoughts every so often.
In theory the study makes sense. Everyone focuses better when they take breaks every so often. However, I find it interesting that the study is advocating letting workers surf the internet at work. The article did specify that in the study only workers surfing the internet for 20% or less of their day were studied and any more than that would be detrimental to their overall productivity. Still, the fact that businesses pay thousands or millions of dollars on software to prohibit people from surfing the web makes me think that companies would not buy into this idea regardless of the evidence. While this all sounds well and good, I do have some skepticism about companies buying in to letting their employees surf the internet. There is a very fine line between surfing the internet for a break and not being productive. I think that companies will not be able to monitor surfing properly and as a result will not endorse it, despite the benifits it might produce.
The study found that people were more productive because they would then concentrate even more when they went back to work. It is the same principle as taking a break from intense work every 30-45 min. When a person is heavily engaged in a task they often function better when they take a break to recollect their thoughts every so often.
In theory the study makes sense. Everyone focuses better when they take breaks every so often. However, I find it interesting that the study is advocating letting workers surf the internet at work. The article did specify that in the study only workers surfing the internet for 20% or less of their day were studied and any more than that would be detrimental to their overall productivity. Still, the fact that businesses pay thousands or millions of dollars on software to prohibit people from surfing the web makes me think that companies would not buy into this idea regardless of the evidence. While this all sounds well and good, I do have some skepticism about companies buying in to letting their employees surf the internet. There is a very fine line between surfing the internet for a break and not being productive. I think that companies will not be able to monitor surfing properly and as a result will not endorse it, despite the benifits it might produce.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
No more Xbox?
This is an interesting article that I came across on Yahoo. The article is previewing a new gaming system called OnLive. It is from a company out in California and is designed to eliminate the need for older conventional gaming systems such as Xbox, Playstation, and even gaming PCs. The basic premise for the system is an online game system that streams games right to the users television without the need for a separate counsel or game disc. In theory this sounds like a great idea... The company advertises that it saves space, money (no need ot buy countless disks or replacing damaged ones), and no need to buy multiple gaming system. However, I do have some concerns and questions.
I will preface all of this with saying that I am not a gamer and am very bad at most video games. My first concern is bandwidth. This product works by being plugged into the users internet connection (i.e. cable modem). There are obvious problems with this. 1)You are limited by bandwidth, so if the connection is bad the games are going to be shoty. 2) It will most likely use so much bandwidth that no one else in the house will be able to use the internet. 3) ISPs most likely will not like the constant bandwidth being pumped to the house. 4) If the internet drops in the middle of a game there is not recovering. A second issue, is there a way to save game? Since it is all played online there is not memory to save it to. Finally there is concern with price. The company has yet to release any pricing for the product, but says that it will be competitive with Xbox Live. I can foresee this getting very expensive quickly if users are not careful.
In theory this product sounds like it could be a great thing, but there are still many kinks that need to be worked out.
I will preface all of this with saying that I am not a gamer and am very bad at most video games. My first concern is bandwidth. This product works by being plugged into the users internet connection (i.e. cable modem). There are obvious problems with this. 1)You are limited by bandwidth, so if the connection is bad the games are going to be shoty. 2) It will most likely use so much bandwidth that no one else in the house will be able to use the internet. 3) ISPs most likely will not like the constant bandwidth being pumped to the house. 4) If the internet drops in the middle of a game there is not recovering. A second issue, is there a way to save game? Since it is all played online there is not memory to save it to. Finally there is concern with price. The company has yet to release any pricing for the product, but says that it will be competitive with Xbox Live. I can foresee this getting very expensive quickly if users are not careful.
In theory this product sounds like it could be a great thing, but there are still many kinks that need to be worked out.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Web Site design practice
My Favorite Things
I'm going to write out some of my favorite things, so you can learn more about me.
- Spring weather
- The color red
- White Sox Baseball
Friday, March 20, 2009
Ooops: Gmail undo.
This is an article I found that addresses one of the most interesting, and I think practical, new additions to gmail. According to the writer, Google has been putting applications into gmail for about a year that, for lack of a better phrase "save you from yourself". These applications attempt to insure that the mail being sent is how the user intended it.
For instance, there is a feature that searches for the word attachment in the email and checks to see if there is actually a document attached. There is another feature that prohibits people from sending drunk emails. I am not sure how many people actually do send drunk emails... perhaps a feature the prevented drunk phone calls or texts might be better used. Nevertheless, if a person tries to send an email at the early hours of the morning gmail has them solve a simple math problem first. While, it sounds like these feature might be somewhat annoying there is of course a way to deactivate them.
However, the newest feature is the one that I find to be most helpful and intriguing, the undo function. This feature allows the user to unsend an email up to 5 seconds after it has sent. I can remember countless times when I have sent an email and then realized that I misspelled a word or typed in a wrong phone number. The undo function is a great idea and I am surprised that no one thought of it earlier. However, if there was one change I would make it would be to give a larger window than 5 seconds. Google officials say that there is an option to increase the interval to 10 seconds, but I still think that is a little short. As the author suggests it would be nice if gmail put the emails into an outbox queue and held them there for a minute or two. Gmail officials did also say that they might increase the interval depending on feedback from users, but they did not want to make it too long so as to delay to email substantially. Regardless of whether or not they choose to increase the interval I still think it is a great feature and another indication of how Google is on the cutting edge of enhancing applications that we normally take advantage of like email, web browsers, and word processors.
For instance, there is a feature that searches for the word attachment in the email and checks to see if there is actually a document attached. There is another feature that prohibits people from sending drunk emails. I am not sure how many people actually do send drunk emails... perhaps a feature the prevented drunk phone calls or texts might be better used. Nevertheless, if a person tries to send an email at the early hours of the morning gmail has them solve a simple math problem first. While, it sounds like these feature might be somewhat annoying there is of course a way to deactivate them.
However, the newest feature is the one that I find to be most helpful and intriguing, the undo function. This feature allows the user to unsend an email up to 5 seconds after it has sent. I can remember countless times when I have sent an email and then realized that I misspelled a word or typed in a wrong phone number. The undo function is a great idea and I am surprised that no one thought of it earlier. However, if there was one change I would make it would be to give a larger window than 5 seconds. Google officials say that there is an option to increase the interval to 10 seconds, but I still think that is a little short. As the author suggests it would be nice if gmail put the emails into an outbox queue and held them there for a minute or two. Gmail officials did also say that they might increase the interval depending on feedback from users, but they did not want to make it too long so as to delay to email substantially. Regardless of whether or not they choose to increase the interval I still think it is a great feature and another indication of how Google is on the cutting edge of enhancing applications that we normally take advantage of like email, web browsers, and word processors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)