Indeed. The key here is recognizing that the "model" approach is fundamentally different than the "superset" approach. Too often these get blended together.
Portraying your idea as the sum of several individual models can be a very effective technique. Saying something like "you can send your friends fake gifts, just like you can on Facebook" and "you have a live chat window like JustinTV" is more likely to promote understanding and less likely to raise questions than saying "Imagine if Facebook was better..."
(Yesterday, I actually saw a presenter get grilled for 20 minutes about features completely unrelated to their program, due largely to the fact that they took this "Imagine If.." approach.)
I would pay money to cruise down that in Street View. I wonder if you could stick the Street View photo module on top of one of those Snow Cats and hit record next time they do a run?
Rain doesn't depress me and actually does make me happy.
That said, I think poetry is typically thematic enough that you could still incorporate some cool weather-based "mood matching" if you used some sort of tagging system.
Quick example: you have a color spectrum below each poem, each user can associate the poem with a color after they read it, and then you link each color to a weather type. On sunny days you would show "yellow" poems, on rainy days you would show "blue" poems, on snowy days you would show "white" poems, etc.
You could even have a color spectrum on your home page as your main entry point into browsing the poetry collection. For whatever color you click on, you get the poem for which the average color tag is the closest match to your selection.
ONMOUSEOVER loves you! It just wants to be your friend!
Also, I just noticed that buried deep within the body section is some juicy metadata about a Fiery Footlong Frenzy. I need to start slipping that into all the code I write. Maybe buried somewhere deep within a table. With some <strike> tags in between for good measure.
Honestly, I'm just excited about the 60fps video that this brings along. Resolution is always a plus... but this 30fps (and sometimes even 24!) nonsense has gone on for too long.
The flicker was particularly noticeable during Avatar - if only James Cameron had gotten his way when he proposed to double framerate while filming that.
Honestly, I would imagine that most applications of something like this would ultimately end up with "picking the nicest looking image" and foregoing the dynamic tidbits.
That said, you could mash the geolocation that you did with locally-targeted weather data to create some pretty fun dynamic logo designs that would be fairly unique to the end user. You could even alter the skin of the entire site to match the "mood" of the user's location. The possibilities could get pretty extreme... even if you did eventually turn it off in the end :)
Thank you. Thank you so much for articulating this.
I'd like to add that historical site analytics should always be a factor in the web developer's decision to support IE6 or not - and in my experience, B2B companies almost always have 40+ percent of users still on IE6.
Yes, we all want IE6 to die. Yes, it makes life harder for us in the development community.
But telling a client that "you can save money on your website if we ignore IE6" is inherently disingenuous, unless your client is already a web technologies expert (and if they're outsourcing web development, I'm doubting that this is the case). Nine times out of ten, the client will jump on the cost-saving opportunity, you will avoid the hassle of developing for backwards compatibility, and you'll feel good for having just stabbed IE6 in the kidney. But when the client's site analytics say that 40% of the customer base is still on IE6 (and this is typical in my experience) then you'll be costing them FAR more in lost business than you'll be saving them in web development costs.
I hate IE6 too... but there's more to it than just the added cost of development - and as stated earlier, many users simply don't have a choice in the matter.
I would argue that this falls into the "cool" part of what, until now, has been entirely scifi - and that I'm absolutely ridiculously excited about seeing more and more of these discoveries in the years to come.
No, there's no hope of ever visiting this place in our respective lifetimes (sans cryogenics), but I'd put money on the prediction that we will certainly see real imagery of exoplanets within 50 years. And that's cool. Really cool. So cool that we'll look back and laugh at the original question of "are all exoplanets bigger than Jupiter and closer to their suns than Mercury?"
Portraying your idea as the sum of several individual models can be a very effective technique. Saying something like "you can send your friends fake gifts, just like you can on Facebook" and "you have a live chat window like JustinTV" is more likely to promote understanding and less likely to raise questions than saying "Imagine if Facebook was better..."
(Yesterday, I actually saw a presenter get grilled for 20 minutes about features completely unrelated to their program, due largely to the fact that they took this "Imagine If.." approach.)