New new camera

Took back the Sony got a Nikon. Couldn't get a good picture out of the Sony. Tried. No matter how much light, etc. It was a shame, the camera was a dream to hold and use. Very fast focus. Much faster than this Nikon. BUT. The pictures that come out of this Nikon easily rival what I was getting out of my D50. The quality is good. So good in fact, that I'm convinced Nikon understands photography better than anyone else. They "get it". Nikon color is different - real and just good. It's not the beachball colors of the pumped up Canons. I have grown to appreciate it and like it so much more than all the rest. This camera is a dream to use too. Very simple.

New writing tool

Got my new AlphaSmart keyboard today!

Photographer 2.65

I picked up a new camera this weekend. Wasn't planning to buy one really. I had sold all my others and was down to one little 5MP Sony Cybershot 3XOpt job that someone had given me because they couldn't charge the battery. One Universal AC adapter later, I had a free camera. I like it a lot (isn't free great) but it was limited.

3x optical is tad (okay a lot) limiting and in movie mode the focus would hunt and hunt and hunt.

So being down to that camera was...um....depressing. So when I came into a little extra dough-re-mi, I went looking with no intention of buying. I keep waffling. I love a good digital SLR but they are so BIG. Not to mention they need accessories and lenses, and lights - oh my! Also none of the DSLR's have a movie mode and honestly - video is GO! If you can't do video with your cam - shame on you.

The quasi-pro hybrids are nice like the Canon S5 - but still BIG. Won't fit in a pocket, need a bag etc.

So when I was in Sears and I picked up this Sony DSC-T100 it was swoon. 5x optical zoom. Nice. All metal - felt really good in the hand. Very cool lens cover that slides down to turn the camera on and a giant 3" LCD on the back. I tried to resist. Sony's have always had a couple of short falls for me. One, they way oversaturate the reds (this one does too) and two - bring on the noise. But oh those Sony skin tones. Mmmmm. Just right. Nice and warm.

Sony's also focus fast and take the shot quickly. Much faster than other digicams I've used.

So after about 30 minutes of playing in the store with it, and surfing for prices on the Internet with my iPhone, I had decided to "sleep on it."

Then the sales lady who was helping me said, "Okay, I work tomorrow at 11am. I could really use the sale, I work on commission."

Okay, shop global but buy local. So I bought. More on the camera later.

Fundamentals of Web 2.6

So what are the fundamental principles of designing for Web 2.6 (2point6)?

1. Minimalism. Just what is asked for, nothing more nothing less. Less really IS more.

2. Mobility. Works across platforms, hardware.

3. Monetization. Everyone who contributes receives a cut.

4. Membership. Has a mechanism for visitors to 'belong."

5. Matters. Is significant to one or more of it's members.

6. Merges. It works and plays with other sites, simply.

7. Manufactures. It creates something rather than just regurgitates what is already out there.

8. Is part of or has a Manual. It comes with (or is) instructions.

Okay I didn't mean to do it all with "M" words but I got on a roll. I stifled the urge to add "Monkeys" and "Monogamy" but just barely. The point is a Web 2.6 site is an interface between a group that manages or manifest some of their interests or concerns.

Announcing Web 2.6 (2point6)

So after researching Web 2.5 we really are past that. It had a few proponents that advocated it as a social enterprise and an always-on-you web. Which is accurate to a degree. But I think we moved maybe one notch past it - so I'm declaring Web 2.6 as the new web.

Web 2.6 is still always-on-you, but it is also always on us. It is more connected to the world wide world and less about being a place you go to and more about finding a place to go. It is less about information and more about directions. It is your electric newspaper that morphs in real time to your interests via your input.

It will be for a select few however, as most folks won't get 2.6 - they will be stuck in 1.0, or 2.0.

Web 3.0 is on it's way. It's the fusion of 3D virtual reality with 3D real reality and you navigate and engage in it in ways that are only hinted at in virtual worlds like Second Life. But that is still a ways away.

In Web 2.6 only a few "get it." Microsoft doesn't. They are busy trying to copy Flash with Silverlight and there is no Flash in 2.6. Web 2.6 is distinctively retro codewise because the browser is limited to react to touch. It is simpler and easier to use. In fact 2.6 retains 2.0's focus on making things simpler and easier to deal with.

It won't be about shoving things down our throats but rather us choosing just what we want. Communication will be faster and less far. Web 2.6 will also focus on building infrastructure at the social and community level that prevents large companies from aggregating content and selecting what we can and can't see at high speed.

Web 2.6 represents a deeper integration of the WWW into IRL. I'll be blogging more about 2.6 (2point6) in the next few days.

Web 2.5 - the web that catches stuff

I thought I was going to write a pithy original post about inventing web 2.5 but I'm late to the party. Sigh.

My Web 2.5 was dubbed so because it's one step forward (Web 3.0) and one half step back. The step forward is the portable, always available Internet. The half step back is the compromises we make to code to make 2.5 work. The trade is way more than fair.

I'm basing the trade-offs on designing pages for the Apple iPhone. You can read the official guidelines here.  Some more interesting comments are here. The upshot is you no longer design for mice but for the human touch (which also makes a nice metaphor). The phone also doesn't support Flash, so you are looking at taking your pages back a bit but not all the way back.

Perhaps the best summary of the experience is here. I know many of you will grouse at the iPhone being a pivotal piece of hardware since there are already so many web connected phones out there. To that I only have one word to say: Macintosh.

If you aren't having intense Deja Vu over the iPhone then you weren't a geek in 1984 (yeah I was). It's the same thing all over. It's SO expensive, it's only Black and White, there are hundreds of CPM and MS-DOS machines out there. Okay right. But how many computers are there out there now that weren't influenced by the Mac interface? Virtually zero.

So Web 2.5 naysayers will be plentiful. In fact they are a vital part of the viral process. But the reality is, if you haven't retooled to design for Web 2.5 - you will.

Also, Web 2.5 will connect us in ways that will make commerce not just simple but intelligent. Consensus marketing will become a norm with the savvy marketer able to attract a "flash" mob (or a "hit" crowd) in minutes.

There are a few barriers to entry at this point:

1) SMS is too #@#@#% expensive. $40 a month for unlimited text seems like gouging. Carriers need to consider the economic impact of dropping this to $20 a month. The new signups alone would offset the price drop.

2) Hardware is pricey too. Even at $399, the iPhone is out of reach for a lot of folks that have money to spend. The value is there honestly but there are too many phones that claim to do the same thing at the $199 and less price point. Just the same God bless the early adopters for they shall change the world.

3) Designers won't want to go back. It's not about learning new tricks as much as it is re-learning old tricks. Blow the dust off that copy of Fireworks and put the Flash back on the shelf.

Web 2.5 won't be about scalability - it will be about sustainability. It will not be about having 7 million "friends" as much as it will be about having 7 (or 70) IRL friends with genuine interests and viable ways to asynchronously communicate "what's up?" It will be about team building more than stardom.

It's going to be very very cool.

My next car

Okay here's what I want to drive to work. Runs on sun.