Galen Gruman epitomizes what is wrong with tech journalism today. We see it with the iPhone reception debacle and now with Windows Phone 7. Tech reporting is dead.  No one takes the time to test or actually use anything anymore.  They just look for what is wrong, harp on it for 2000 words, and then hope their crap hits the first page of techmeme.   And then when it does, a bunch of no-name traffic scabs repeat what the first idiot says and it becomes a popular meme.  It is getting to the point where the only places to get  “real” reviews of a device are engadget and cnet.  Lets hope these two bastions of actual tech reporting don’t fall.

Update:  For a point of comparison, compare Gruman’s drivel with someone that actually has used and develops for the device.

About a year and a half ago, I had to make a decision on which platform to build my personal projects on. At the time, I had a pretty deep knowledge of .NET, a decent knowledge of Java, and a very minimal knowledge of PHP. I immediately threw Java out the window because of my horrible experiences trying to build large Java projects at University and at my 9-5. I then did POCs of both .NET and PHP. I really liked .NET but hosting was more expensive. PHP was a bit awkward at first, but after a couple weeks I grew to love it. So, I decided to go with PHP as my platform of choice. After a year and a half, I couldn’t be more happy about the decision. I have not run into any platform limitations and best of all, I no longer have to compile. Removing this restriction has really sped up my workflow and removed a completely unnecessary distraction. If I had the choice, I would not ever go back to compiled development environments.

I have been thinking a lot about the current state of web development. And, I think that with the next generation of web browsers we are going to see a turning point for how front-end developers approach the problem of building a website or web application. In the past, there were really two major problems that complicated front-end development. The first was the need for cross-browser compatibility. Legacy browsers and evolving standards really made it a chore for a front-end developer to develop a site that worked well across all browsers. I use to joke that my job as a front-end developer existed solely to support buggy IE browsers. And, honestly, this joke wasn’t far from the truth. To complicate things, there was an opposing force that said that not only should sites work well across browsers but they should be as rich and interactive as native applications. This was the RIA (Rich Interactive Application) movement. I was recently in a meeting where someone lauded the use of a simple table in favor of interactive data-grid because it was something that we used 10 years ago. This attitude characterized RIA, in that the coolness or the richness of the widget was more important than the problem it was trying to solve. RIA applications really epitomized the virtue of using something because we could, not because we should.

But, as the title mentions, I think we are at a turning point for web development. With the emergence of HTML5 and an increased emphasis on standard support in the next generation of browsers, gone are the days of worrying about browser compatibility. Sure, it will be in the back of our minds, but it will never reach the frustration level of having to build an IE6 compatible site. With that said, I don’t think it will be all hammocks and Mai Tais for front-end developers. I think the problem of browser compatibility will quickly be replaced with the new problem of platform compatibility. Brought on by mobile devices and touch input, platform compatibility is the new major problem facing web development. It introduces a slew of new problems such as scaling to mobile resolutions (typically 320-480px), handling new input events (swipe, long tap, etc.), making touch friendly widgets, etc, etc. This will have a major effect on how we build sites. I speculate that we will see more fluid layouts, less data-grids, and whole lot less RIA widgets. We will do a lot more with standard HTML5 and CSS3, because it will be more feature-rich and work better across emerging platforms.

Personally, this turning point has changed how I approach web development. On my personal projects, I have shifted focus toward HTML5 development and now approach UI design with an emphasis on touch-friendly elements and flexible layouts. I have discontinued the use of hover based input, and have gone away from using grids to display data as they scale poorly horizontally. I will be introducing a new version of matthewsmith.com in the next couple months that follows this new focus, and am actively making changes to projects I have in development.

My big home renovation project for 2010 was tiling the kitchen floor.  If you have read previous posts, you know I dabble a bit in home improvement.  But, I think that this is the first big project that I have taken on.  I honestly never really set out to tile my own floor.  The original idea was just to demo the existing linoleum and then hire someone who knows what they are doing to tackle the rest.  But when getting estimates, we seemed to get two types:  (1) a cheap estimate from a guy without insurance, or  a (2) ridiculously high estimate from a company with insurance.  I really did not want to take a risk on option 1, and I didn’t want to triple my budget for option 2.  So, I was left going the home handyman route.

Luckily, I had a bunch of family and friends that knew what they were doing.  I got help from the wrangler, two brother in-laws, and one soon-to-be father in-law.  They basically set me on the right path and helped with a lot of the work.  If you have never tiled before, there are really just 5 steps to the process:  (1) demo the existing floor, (2) lay the backer board, (3) lay the tiles, (4) grout the tiles, and (5) seal the floor.  Out of these steps, I think that step 2 is really the most time consuming.  This really surprised me.  In all the videos, it seemed to be the most straight-forward step.  But, in reality, this took a lot of time.  In our kitchen, we were installing the tile around existing fixtures, so we had to make a lot of cuts.  Surprisingly, this was easier with the tile, because of their relatively small size.  With the backer board, it seemed like we were always making crazy “L” shaped cuts to get it the board to fit.  We used a jigsaw for most of these cuts, and the board really teared through the bits.  After we got the backer board down, the rest of the process went pretty smooth.  I did run into a few problems with tiles not being the same size (1-2mm makes a difference).  But, I rectified this by measuring the tiles before laying each and throwing out the inconsistent ones.

Before laying tile, I got a lot of good advice.  Such as (1) don’t worry if it looks a little off before grouting, because the grout will make it look better, (2) make sure to seal the floor with a good 30 year sealer, and (3) take your time.  I would add to the list, (1) make sure to clean the dried mud from the cracks really well before grouting and (2) prepare to spend a couple weeks on this if you are not doing it full time.  I honestly thought that this was a weekend project and it turned out to take a couple weekends to get it complete.

So, with all of that said, here are the results.

Before (after demo):

After:

Some nice transition details:

Microsoft is releasing Project Natal this fall.  If you haven’t heard, it is a NUI add-on to the XBOX360 that allows for motion-based gaming without the controllers.  This is extremely cool, but I honestly do not think I am going to buy it.  And, it is not because of the $149 price barrier that Gizmodo projects.  I will probably not buy the device because the Wii sucked so bad.  Yes, there were a few fun games here-and-there.  But, most of these were first party games.  And, some (like the New Super Mario Land) barely even used the motion sensors.  In the end, the Wii was essentially a gimmick that for me at only a short lived appeal.  I am lucky enough to have a choice between the 360 and the Wii on a daily basis, and 99 out of 100 times, I chose to go play the 360.  I think this is pretty true for my age demographic.  A number of people I know that have owned the Wii ended up getting a second console.  I think this is because (1) there are very few games on the Wii targeted at gamers my age (not 5-15), (2) motion-based gaming really only works well for a few genres, and (3) playing SD graphics on an HDTV just kind of sucks.  While the 360 does throw HD into the mix, I just don’t see this as being enough for me to really want another motion-based console.

I am really digging what Google has done with Android.  Froyo (the just released update to Android) features beautiful iconography, smooth transitions, and just about everything you could want from a modern mobile OS.  The problem is that a lot of the third party manufacturers that are releasing Android devices insist on adding their own third party skin to differentiate their offering.  HTC offers Sense, Motorola offers Blur, and Samsung offers a  horrible new skin with their Galaxy S device.  While some of these are nice, they really are not much better than Froyo (I actually prefer Froyo to all of these skins).  And, these skins really slow the upgrade time when new versions of Android come out.  So, my question is why do this at all?  I personally will not purchase a device that does not feature stock Froyo.  And, I know that a lot of Android enthusiasts feel the same way.  I really think that the way for manufacturers to differentiate their offerings in the Android ecosystem is via responsive upgrades, hardware specs, industrial design, and apps/widgets that work with the stock Android offering.  I really think that all of these custom UIs are bad for the manufacturers and really bad for the Android ecosystem.

As a side note, what is Samsung thinking?  Their hardware for the new Galaxy S looks great, but this new UI is just horrible.  Does anyone is S. Korea really think this looks better than stock Froyo. Really?  I am pulling for you guys because you make some awesome TVs, but you have to rethink this strategy.

Update: I was reading more about Sense UI (and other add-ons) and apparently you can at least disable them.  But, I still think it would be pretty annoying if you have to wait to upgrade every time Google releases an update to Android.

Another Update: Case in point, here is yet-another-horrible UI on top of Android. What is Acer thinking? Are design aesthetics really that much different across the pond?

I actually remembering watching the first episode of Lost six years ago in the basement of my parent’s house in St. Chuck.  I was hooked from day one, and apparently brought another devotee with me.   Sunday night, I watched the finale in Eric’s loft overlooking the mean streets of St. Louis.  It somehow seems fitting that what began in a dark basement lit by the glow of an SDTV, ended in a fancy loft surrounded by DTS and HD.   Looking back over the last 6 seasons, I think it was a brilliant use of time.  While sometimes a bit slow, the underlying plot and all the questions kept me coming back year after year.  This was capped by a moving finale that tied it all in a nice bow.  Do I still have questions that were unanswered?  Yes.  But, am I complaining?  No.   There are a plenty of answers on /r/lost, Dark UFO, and Lost… and Gone Forever to keep me entertained for weeks (and perhaps longer).  In the end, I think it was as good as a TV show can get.  It effortlessly mixed science, technology, theology, and meta-physics into an easily digestible 1 hour block.   I will remember it most for the great 1 liners, the poignant questions, the interesting characters, and the great arguments with my friends Eric and Theodore.

In The web sucks. Browsers need to innovate., the author (the co-founder of  posterous) compares the types of apps found on the iPad and iPhone with what is on the Web and comes to the conclusion that the web sucks and we will soon “see a decline in web traffic and search in the coming years”.  He proposes that browser vendors break from following standards, develop their own APIs, and begin innovating on top of these APIs.  While I think that this is a very shortsighted recommendation, I think he makes a very interesting observation: does the web suck (on mobile devices)?

Better UI in the form of proprietary technology has always been around.  It is not unique to the iPad and iPhone.  What is different about mobile app development is that web browsers were really bad on mobile devices, and apps were really good.  This huge disparity in quality was brand new, and really drove proprietary mobile app development.  Not only were the browsers bad, but developers did not target these devices, so viewing websites was horrible as well.  So, apps filled the quality gap and became wildly popular.

But is this success short lasting or sustainable?  To answer this question, we need to look at why web apps won over desktop apps in the first place.    When it comes down to it, web apps won out because they were open and connected.  Their openness allowed them to run anywhere making it easy to access the service from any device.  And, because they were open search engines could easily find and index data making it a breeze to get information fast.  In addition, web apps did not stand alone.  They were connected to each other making it easy for a user to transition from one site to another.  Mobile apps, on the other hand, are not open and not connected.  The portability of the devices make them as available as web apps, however, their closed nature makes them a lot less connected than web apps.  I think this is where mobile apps fall short.   In the long run, we have the better UI of mobile apps versus the openness and connectivity of web apps.

What is really interesting about this article is the new perspective of the iPhone age.  Prior to the iPhone, everyone’s first source of information and entertainment was the web.  Now, it is shifting to mobile apps.  I personally believe that this was due to a deficiency in mobile browser vendors and developers to provide a good experience on the web.  But, it will be interesting to see if this trend continues.  I personally think that in the end, the same advantages that allowed web application development to overtake desktop development (openness, connectivity, etc.) will win out over proprietary mobile app development.  But, only time will tell.

If you haven’t heard yet…via Letterman, Modern Family, major newspapers, tech blogs…the iPad is being released tomorrow.  But, this is not a review.  If you want one, check out Walt Mossberg’s piece.  And, if that is too long, let me sum it up for…great for consuming content, not so great for creating content (well, text-based content).  I think I read that somewhere before.

Regardless of the reviews, this device is going to be pretty big, because lets be honest…it is freakin’ cool.  As a web developer, the question I have is—how is this going to affect the web?  Is it going to be good for web development or bad for web development?

I see this from two perspectives.  On the positive side, Apple has eschewed Flash and implemented standards-based HTML5 for video.  If I was a flash developer, I would be concerned.  But, as a web developer, I always saw flash as a necessary evil, and really am not too sad to see it go.  The second positive thing about the iPad is that it is definitely going to make the web more accessible.  Every iPad has a browser.  I don’t think it is going to bring more people to the web, but the mobility of the device might just increase the frequency people hit sites (even just a little).

Now for the negatives…the iPad has essentially done what Microsoft has been trying to do for a couple years now…pull people off the web and put them into proprietary applications.  Not only did Apple accomplish this, but they did it in a way that they now get 30% of the sales price of all applications sold on the platform.  This is brilliant… a coup of epic proportions.  But, this is also extremely troubling for web developers, as 70% or so of these new apps are really just websites wrapped in a touch friendly container.  Is this a shift of the magnitude as what we saw in the 90s when all desktop apps began moving toward web apps?  Probably not.  But, it does mark an end of an era…where most new and innovative apps were web apps.

Nokia—Right now it looks like my e71 will be my first and last Nokia device.  While there are a few really good things about the device, its seems that Nokia’s next generation offerings (Symbian^3 and Meego) are simply evolutionary.  With Android looking better every day and WP7 looming, it will take a lot for any of their devices to break into my short list.  Honestly, I think they are done in the US unless they snap up Palm.  This seems pretty obvious to me…a company with great hardware and a so-so OS acquires a company with a great OS and so-so hardware.  Problem solved, right?  I just don’t see Nokia swallowing their pride and going this route.

Apple/HTC Lawsuit—This is such an odd lawsuit. To me, it seems like Apple really got pissed off about Android, but rather than suing Google decided to go after its smaller, weaker friend.  It will definitely be interesting to see how this plays out.  If Apple can successfully defend its multi-touch patent in court, what does that mean for the rest of the industry?  Will we not be able to see multi-touch on WP7, Android, and Palm?  Or, will these company’s be forced to license this tech?  My guess is that it will do little to deter Apple’s competitors.  And, most will just fine ways to circumvent the patent.   But whatever the outcome, I think most people agree that patenting a means to interact with an interface is ridiculous.  Apple should not be able to patent multi-touch.  Could you imagine what would have happened, if companies tried to enforce patents on the keyboard and mouse?  Hopefully, the continued criticism coming out of this lawsuit will finally cause the US patent office to change how it deals with IT patents.