Over the past week, I’ve quietly redesigned this blog to be somewhat up to my current standards. Before, I was using a customized version of Jake Paul’s theme, Solstice, which while attractive, was not my own work.

There were quite a few things I wanted to achieve with this redesign:

• Most importantly, I wanted to have clear and easily legible typography on articles. This is, after all, a blog, and must serve its primary function above all. I also wanted to give myself a unique and somewhat more consistent personal brand, which I think this succeeds in doing.

• I wanted the header to be a window into a photographic snapshot. It will be either selected randomly from a selection of my best shots, or updated on a semi-regular schedule. The end goal being: to push myself to take more and better photos, more often.

• Lastly, I wanted to try to use some cool modern technologies and ideas. The header uses subtle parallax scrolling, which I think looks gorgeous. The styles is done in a LESS stylesheet, which makes coding CSS a breeze. I’m using semantic HTML 5 tags, like header and article, and using a few CSS3 animations. All in all, this was a fun and light coding exercise.

For a fun easter egg, click the little expand icon at the very top-left of any page.

Overall, I’m very satisfied with the result, but will no doubt keep tweaking it over time.

Credit where credit is due: I’ve drawn inspiration from many places, including: Sebastiaan de With, Dustin Curtis, and Hero's parallax header. I also used Andy Davies' pattern, light wool.

At the end of Level 3 at the California College of the Arts, it’s not uncommon for graphic design students to spend twenty hours a day on campus, fueled by gallons of Red Bull and dreadful coffee (and for many, handfuls of Adderall).

Why, you ask? Because we to finish our projects for the semester, polish off all the work we’ve done over the past two years, and present it to an intimidating panel of faculty and design professionals. After presenting and talking about our work for 45 minutes, the panel goes away to deliberate and writes up a grade and a feedback sheet which sets the tone for the rest of our path through design school, and our design careers thereafter.

The day after the presentation, after the celebratory hangover has passed, we are assigned a 6’ by 6’ exhibition space, in which we curate and present our strongest work done at CCA. My exhibition is pictured above.

Macchiato

This past June, I attended my very first WWDC. The conference, the people and the parties were all amazing, and it was definitely a highlight. Inspired by the spirit of the conference, and all the new technologies presented, I set out to conquer my laziness and build and ship a new app.

I’m a huge fan of Markdown. So much so that I write nearly everything in it. From emails and notes, to documentation and blog posts. Unfortunately, writing Markdown meant one of two things for me: either launching TextEdit and switching it to plain text mode, or launching TextMate and writing in a code editor. Neither were really suited to the task.

To remedy this, I built Macchiato. I made full use of Lion’s new technologies. In fact, Macchiato only works on Lion. You’ve got full-screen mode, auto-save and versioning. The internals of the app uses NSRegularExpression, sandboxing, Automatic Reference Counting, and several other Lion-only APIs.

Macchiato is about being the very best at doing one thing: writing in Markdown. I’ve tried to keep an emphasis on usability, design and typography. I wanted to make it a joy to use, and for me it did the trick. I use it every day.

Check out Macchiato!

The Incredible Hypocrisy of Modern Citizens

One thing I’ve noticed about American culture from living in the USA for over two years now is that there’s a deep kind of hypocrisy running through our morals. We condemn many things for being indecent, while we allow much worse things to go under the guise of free speech. Meanwhile, individuals feel an incredible sense of entitlement when it comes to their perceived rights.

One recent example was when my social network feeds were inundated with calls to sign a petition for Facebook to add transexual options to the gender option. Now, I don’t want to get into gay-rights politics, but I am fervently against the idea that Facebook has any kind of obligation to include a feature because not doing so would offend a minority of its users.

I take issue with the idea that some people think they are entitled to the feature—that it is their fundamental right. They are not, and it is not. Should we start adding “Flying Spaghetti Monster” to the religion drop downs too, because some people want to identify with it? Point is, with any popular product, people will find something to rebel against. If not this, it would be something else. People need to realize that Facebook has a vision for their product, and that they need to be able to follow it unimpeded.

One fundamental aspect of good design is that it has been curated by somebody who knows what they’re doing, and has intimate knowledge of what they’re designing. This is why when users tell you that you should implement a feature, and that it will make your product better (and make you money), they’re most often full of crap. This is why anything on 99designs.com is crap. This is why Apple products are so great, and why Facebook beat MySpace.

Remember Henry Ford? “If I had asked people what they wanted, they would have said faster horses.”

My goal as a developer and designer is to make a product that people will love, and will make the world better. However, the way I’m going to do that is by thinking about what’s best for the majority of my users. The truth is 99.9% of users don’t care for outlying setting such as transgender identity. Transgender identity is much trickier than just adding an “Other” drop down item. If you allow it, how do you then genderize all the pronouns? Do you default to “he,” “she,” or use the combination “he/she?” Or worse, do you turn the user into an object and go with “it?” Bottom line is, it’s just not worth doing for the 0.1% of user’s feelings. They’re convinced with all their might that, surly, they deserve special treatment. But really, they don’t.

Secondly, I’m growing extremely tired of America’s prude culture. People are constantly getting offended at really silly things. Just look at video games, for example. You can’t sell a video game with “sexually suggestive” language to teenagers under 18, if you can put it on the market at all. Yet, there’s no problem with selling games to 10 year olds that vividly depicts ripping people in half.

Meanwhile, in real life, some words are prohibited and frowned upon for the sake of political correctness, while much worse sentiments are perfectly acceptable. It’s perfectly fine to go on Fox News and say “Mexican Immigrants are mostly criminals and should be deported,” or even openly be a member of the Ku Klux Klan, because it’s free speech. On the other hand, though, exclaiming “Holy Shit!” on broadcast television when the Giants score a home run will get you a class action lawsuit.

Personally, I think people should be able to say whatever they want—except for maybe hate speech. As for products, their owner have the right to design them however they want and let the general population vote with their actions. Isn’t that the founding principle of capitalism and the American Dream? Lastly, people really need to get off their high horse, when it comes to accusing everybody of discrimination.

Armin Vit on Khoi Vinh’s argument that sending well-crafted print promo is worthless and wasteful, because they inevitably end up tossed out:

Designers send out printed promos to get your attention OUTSIDE of the internet. They want you to look at the piece of work as an actual physical specimen that demands a different kind of interaction than a webby thing. Whether you toss it or not is not the point, just as it’s not the point whether you ignore an e-mail or Tweet or not. It’s about saying “Stop, look at this. Got it? Okay, carry on.” There is nothing wrong with throwing things away (or recycling them).

[…]

I bet you have dozens of design books on your bookshelf that you haven’t seen in years. I know I do. I have them because they give me a weird sense of joy in knowing that I have them in my collection and accessible at any moment. Which is the same reason I, personally, hoard designers’ promotions and things. I have a bookcase filled with them and there is stuff I haven’t looked at in more than ten years. But every now and then I want to remember what a piece looked like either for reference or just for pleasure and I know that it’s there, not in some landfill.

To conclude: Designers, please don’t stop making things or refrain from sending them out. Those things play an important role in the way we consume design material. If everything becomes JPGs, GIFs, and PNGs served on a browser then we are screwed—anyone can create things that look good on the screen, it takes real mettle, vision, and investment to produce something that has physicality and presence. Even if it’s fleeting. For that one moment you have the ability to evoke a response from someone, and that’s not worth tossing out.

I couldn’t agree more. Khoi’s post is interesting and raises some valid concern—but I fully disagree with him. There’s something wonderful about a well-crafted print piece that digital media can never achieve. A pop-up will will never obscure a print poster to notify you of an incoming tweet or email. For the seconds (or perhaps even minutes) that you’re looking at the work, you’re fully engaged and responding to the designer’s intended experience. That’s worth much more than an email can ever get you.

On Saturday, I attended the Compostmodern conference on sustainable design. Sustainability is a fancy buzzword used by big corporations so that they can feel socially responsible. File it away with previous contenders such as Synergy and Trickle-down, and don’t ever use it. But beyond the ill-advised terminology lies an really important concept; which is that as we design, we have responsibilities that go beyond the client’s brief and balance sheet. Sure, those should always be the primary considerations—but we also have a responsibility to our environment and society. Sustainability is at the intersection of consideration for the environment, society and economy.

In order to get the most out of the concepts from the conference, though, design must be defined as more than any or all of the professions suffixed with the word design. (Industrial, Graphic, Web, Interior, Interaction… you name it!) Design is—or should be—everything a company does. Every interaction anyone ever has with a company, good or bad, becomes part of its brand. One of the first concepts introduced by several of the speakers was that of 360° Design. With 360° Design, the challenge is to design a product or brand across all aspects of its presence, whether web, print, physical, or even the experience of using it. The concepts of sustainable design, though, apply to more than design. You can draw from it in entrepreneurship, leadership, or even as a way of life.

For me, two nuggets of wisdom stood out from the various talks. The first one pertains to getting a message effectively across through what speaker Jonah Sachs calls the Myth Gap. A successful myth is the combination of explanation, meaning and story. Explanation serves the rational mind, while meaning serves the emotional. The last element, the story, is what engages the consumer. A successful story can be further divided up in three basic elements: freaks, cheats and familiars. Freaks are human characters that are extraordinary in some way. Cheats are those don’t follow the status quo. This includes both criminals (whom the viewer is against), or rebels (whom the viewer roots for). The last element is familiars: things which viewers can relate to. It is by combining all of these elements that most of the successful stories caught traction.

Secondly, Lisa Gansky introduced attendees to the concept of the mesh. The mesh is about the sharing of experiences and physical things among people. The new wave of popular services provide access to experiences, rather than ownership of things. Netflix, for example, lets people experience movies without having to buy and own them. Zipcar, similarly, allows for on-demand access to a car without having to own a car. Airbnb provides peer-to-peer access to other members’ proprieties without having to rent a hotel room.

The overarching theme of the conference, though, was sustainability. The common perception of sustainability is that of radical green-activism such as Greenpeace. Many, including myself, find this kind of activism off-putting. Not only does it alienate me with its holier-than-thou attitude, but it often does much less good than what can be achieved through friendlier means. The key to getting people involved in a project that benefits the greater good is to incentivize the better option. Give them an alternative that does not compromise their experience of the product.

Green is not absolute. The goal should not be to have a green product, but rather a greener version of what people currently have and want. Sure, the warm feeling one gets when doing something good can be an incentive; but don’t kid yourself, people will always put their quality of lift first, and rightly so. After all, that is the whole basis of the american dream and the founding of this very nation—the pursuit of happiness. As Benjamin Franklin once said, “those who sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.” Rephrasing his quote, I will boldly claim that those who sacrifice the pursuit of happiness for the hope of a better future deserve neither.