> What mattered was to get the idea out and to start the conversation, editing and polish would follow later.
On the other hand, careless writing shows that the author places little value on his thoughts, for if he thought them important he would spend a little more time on their delivery, ensuring the contents don't get destroyed in the process.
I think it depends on context and execution. For example Twitter always used them over tweets in their app, and it works quite well, or do you disagree?
I think it's a little unfair to dismiss this design pattern just because it's not immediately discoverable on page load. It really depends on the context in which this is used. Also, while better looks is one thing, having less controls on the page leaves the user with a smaller cognitive load, giving them more attention to focus on and process the content.
> And if your point is that being able to do those projects and ALSO "buy what you want" (e.g. nicer TV and car) will give you much greater satisfaction from your life, you are clueless about human nature. You might get a thrill from these items in the short term, but eventually you'll just want more and better ones. You'll be in the same place (psychologically) as where you started.
You make a mistake in your point. The mistake is that you assume that he wants to achieve happiness by acquiring these material possessions like that new TV, an expensive car, etc. He won't, and he knows that. What he'll achieve is pleasure. Short term pleasure, maybe, but so what? Desire for pleasure is natural, and being in a position to get all the toys you want will satisfy that, and keep satisfying it.
It won't fill any holes in your soul or give you long-term happiness, but it's not supposed to. That burning desire to live better is what drives human progress. Look around and see how comfortable our existence is today compared to a thousand years ago. Cars, electricity, phones, heating, plumbing--so much convenience. None of that is necessary to exist, but it's something that makes living our lives much more pleasant. That new TV or car isn't going to give our lives more meaning, but it will make them more interesting and satisfying.
Yes but how do you use WordPress without installing a bunch of stuff on your computer? You need MySQL and you need a web server to run it, probably Apache. These don't come standard with Windows, so it's not that much easier to get WordPress running locally. It's true that many hosts now offer very easy WordPress installs, but there is no reason why something like this can't be set up for Toto. But as it is right now, Toto is a great WP replacement for hackers.
Looks good. One problem: it was very difficult to actually find a link to each app's website. The little "Go to app" doesn't even look like a link. I suggest making the site link much more prominent, underlined, and perhaps use the URL of the site to make it even easier to see.
What's the value in dumping 50 links on your readers? Are we supposed to read all that? Isn't it the function of the editor to go through them and select their picks, thus saving us time by presenting only the best content? I really don't get these long lists.
Good point, but you don't necessarily need this input device to be in your pocket, and it doesn't have to come in the form of a phone. For example, here's one solution: accept/decline calls right from your headset without taking the iPad out of the bag. Perhaps the headset will tell you the caller id when you press a certain button so you can choose whether or not to take the call. Dialing can be done through voice as well, or take out the pad and make the call using the touch screen.
Simple: bluetooth headsets. If you think about it, the current way of using a phone -- i.e. holding up a device to your ear and keeping it there for the duration of the conversation -- is quite clumsy. Making a call on the tablet and talking through a light headset is much more elegant.
Maybe you could use one slider with 2 directions. E.g. the slider button starts in the center, and you could slide it right to unlock and go to the home screen, or slide it left to go straight to the phone screen.
It's not about real good/harm, it's about perceived harm. When confession lies at the core of your religion, you end up obsessing over your "sins" and then praying for forgiveness. When this becomes a norm in your life you'll have "more to answer for" than the guy who doesn't spare a second thought for his actions. Charity then becomes a way to pay for your sins.
Why not? Do you suggest we assume everyone corrupt just because there is "plenty of corruption everywhere in Russia"? Everyone is guilty by association?
While less is more in online forms is good advice, the thing about 7 items is wrong in this context. This is because while you may only keep 7 items in your head at any time you're not actually using this skill when filling out your form -- you're just scanning down the list for a particular item you need, not trying to memorize the whole list. Even if you're trying to choose between comparable items, you're still memorizing those few items, not the whole list.
Brand awareness. An ad for a BMW for example. You're not likely to click and buy the car right there, so it works the same way as their TV ad does -- it'll keep the brand in your memory until you need to make a car purchase decision.
You also have to remember this is a showcase, and sites with a lot of visuals tend to make better showcases simply because they're more fun to look at even if they're not easier or even more fun to actually use.
The numbers matter. The issue here is this: everybody isn't equal, we're all unique. Some people work hard, are more intelligent, and contribute more to society. Some people are of higher value, depending on your metrics. So a murderer (who takes from society) has less worth than a scientist whose research creates new technologies that aid society. Everyone should have equal 'rights', but everyone is not equal however.
The problem here is that you cannot know the value of this one individual vs the five. People aren't a set of bricks, all manufactured to be the same size and from the same material. Saving five people vs one is a guess -- you can be wrong and save a group of people who contribute nothing and kill the man who does. But the numbers still apply because one man cannot be worth more than thousands for example -- and I think part of this experiment was to find out what your threshold for this was.
On the other hand, careless writing shows that the author places little value on his thoughts, for if he thought them important he would spend a little more time on their delivery, ensuring the contents don't get destroyed in the process.