Apple changes their browser prefs defaults after hacker attacks?

Apple's Cupertino campus actually got hacked, which is amazing, and it's sad that Java browser plugins were the weak point in their security. Sad but not surprising.

But their decision to change the default settings on their Macs is even more amazing! Shipping browsers with Java plugins turned off? Don't mix this up - we're talking Java, not Javascript, but still, that's pretty amazing.

This means, all of a sudden, there's a wall between Java and Mac users that wasn't there before, and this is something we'll probably see across operating systems in the next little while. And this is a great thing because in-browser Java has always seemed super sketchy to me.

Web Links from Non-Web Apps

When a link on a website takes the user to another site, or opens a new window or tab or something, it's best practice to mark that link, so that users understand that it's different from other links on the site.

The same is true for desktop applications. When a menu item opens a web browser, it's doing something that other menu items don't do, and that users should know about before clicking on the item:

• it switches programs unexpectedly
• this initially makes the user think they accidentally switched programs
• so they'll usually try to switch back to it from the blank page or loading browser
• they'll often try the command again
• it can take several tries before the user realizes the program is operating as expected
• they may also think that the program they were in just has crashed or experienced an error
• if the web browser isn't active, it gets launched
• this can look like the beginnings of a crash report, reinforcing the user's suspicion of a program error
• the first thing a user thinks is "I have accidentally launched my browser" or "some browser window just spontaneously spawned another window, which is always a bad sign"
• a new browser tab or window is created, obscuring what was there before
• if users switch back to the browser, they won't immediately recognize it as the browser window they had open
• they tend to keep looking for the now-hidden tab in other browser windows
• this may seem like a stretch, but users are blind to details which they don't think have changed, and especially things that they didn't initiate

Why NOT to Have a Website

For small business people and artists, maintaining a website, especially a traditional website, and especially a really slick one, is a big task to add to the to-do list. And even with a lot of initial effort and the regular content updates that make a site worthwhile, it's still not enough - in order to stay fresh and functional as things change, it'll need to be changed and redesigned from time to time. Most people have an easier time changing their signage and business cards than their website, and they end up wondering whether it's helping or hurting their goals.

For users who clearly don't need a custom site, I recommend blogging instead, because it serves most people's needs and doesn't cost them much. Web designers (like me) who previously had a hard time offering good value to small businesses are now finding ways to visibly re-brand Wordpress, Blogger and Tumblr accounts, making them more appealing to clients who don't like the idea of geeky logos appearing on their sites.

Most people, however, don't need to do any web publishing. They just need the equivalent of a business card and a sign - online. They need to communicate the basic format of what they're offering, whether it's great sandwitches or great dog photos, and how they can be contacted.

For people using the internet to find products and services, what matters most is being able to find the information they're looking for, and assess how fresh and accurate it is. They'll do a search, check whichever sources of information look promising, and then choose among them depending on which seems most accurate.

Let's examine a typical internet task:

1. Search for store name + city name
2. Scan the top results that look related, and open the official site, as well as a community business listing, in new tabs.
3. Since the business listing and the official site list different hours, get phone number off official site, as it's more likely to be accurate.
   At this point, having to make a phone call for information that should be available online may derail the task, especially if a competing business offers information with a recent date on the content.
4. The business has to deal with another extra phone call.

This is pretty typical on the internet. This business could improve their initial interaction with the customer in three ways:

1. Maintaining awareness of their own online presence, so they knew where their information would need to be updated, and take control over their third-party community listing, and
2. Indicating when the information was last changed, assuring web users that the information has been recently approved by management.
3. Providing a calendar of any closure dates - statutory and bank holidays for example.

Here are some advantages of using 3rd-party listings, social networking and media sharing sites instead of or in addition to an official website.

• Users trust and understand them already.
• It's easy to make it clear that the information is official and up-to-date.
• They're maintained by large companies with research & development budgets, so they can worry about keeping them up-to-date, on their dime.
• Even if their site is tacky, it only reflects on them, not your business.
• Listings sites index very well in search engines - usually better than private websites.
• They usually allow for user comments, which enhances credibility.
• They're well-supported because of their size, so if you need help with something, it's easy to find the answers.
• It's more reliable - less likely to go offline, get attacked, be accidentally blocked by Google, or suffer from traffic overload.
• Businesses benefit by being listed together, providing a context of competitive representation that attracts people's attention, just like stores benefit from themed districts in a city.
• It's much easier to prepare and present the content, because each listings or sharing site has a format that's easy to follow.
• Maintaining several different listings and accounts might seem like a repetitive hassle, but each of them serves a different kind of community in a way that suits them. Each site is an opportunity to present information in a way that maximizes that format and engages that audience.

Some online directories, such as online yellow pages, are open-ended, and some are specific to an industry or a niche, like TripAdvisor.

The real meat of engaging with one's online presence is researching these opportunities, and they're different for everyone and every business. With a little research, anyone can find out where they belong online - and then it's just a matter of keeping things up-to-date, responding to comments, and continuing the research as the landscape changes in reaction to their efforts.

So as usual, the message is, you don't need to spend a bunch of money or waste a bunch of time to look good and get things done on the 'net. It just takes a bit of patience, like everything else about doing business.

Even if you are maintaining profiles on 3rd-party sites, it's nice to have an official site to "anchor" and connect all the online profiles. And it's a good reason to develop an internet presence before creating a private website. But if it takes time away from responding to comments and keeping your profiles and listings fresh, and especially if it doesn't contain content that's not available elsewhere and couldn't be presented better elsewhere, then it's slowing things down.

Setting up a proper web development testing environment using VirtualBox and Windows on Linux or Mac

First off, it's best to be able to do your web development on a Mac because

• Coda, by Panic Software, is a great app and it's not for Windows or Linux
• It's harder (maybe impossible) to set up a Mac emulator on Windows or Linux than it is to emulate those operating systems on a Mac. So if you want it all, get a Mac. What I personally prefer is to have a physical computer for each of the main user groups in your target market.

I do my development on Ubuntu Linux, and have Macs around for testing. I need to be able to test with all the popular web browsers on Mac and Windows. That means:

• Chrome for Linux and Windows
• Safari for Mac and Windows
• Firefox for Linux, Mac and Windows
• Internet Explorer for Windows

So on my Linux computer, I use VirtualBox, a great free emulator from Sun Microsystems, and I have a Windows XP install that I use in a 1024 x 768 window. I have Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer, and Safari installed on it.

Because Chrome has the best DOM Inspector (the "Inspect this element" function in the right-click menu), and because Chrome uses the Webkit engine which also powers Safari, and because those are the two fastest-growing browsers in terms of active user base, I use Chrome as my main development and testing environment. Once I get something working in Chrome, I verify that it works in Firefox and Internet Explorer. I try to do this verification as frequently as is convenient, so that I don't end up having to backtrack and use Firebug in Firefox, which is kind of clunky, or Internet Explorer's absolutely hellish DOM inspector, to debug a webpage.

In Internet Explorer 8, you can use the Compatibility View and Developer Tools to inspect how a page would perform in earlier versions of the browser, but it's a good idea to have a Windows2000 install with IE6 as one of your VirtualBox machines, if IE6 compatibility is a requirement for your projects. As a side-note about IE6: I exercise due diligence in using industry-standard best-practices, which dictate that, at the very least, the site should work in all browsers, and look as good as it can in each, even if that means looking different in each. If a client demands that their site be identical in all browsers, and especially if there's anything even somewhat cool about the site, it can double or even triple the budget. Web Designers rarely present this information to potential clients, because we're embarrassed about how helpless we are to accomplish this task efficiently. We all blame the software.

Anyway, here's how to actually look at your files in emulated Windows without having to post them online:

In VirtualBox, you can set up shared folders to bridge the gap between your Windows browsers and your Linux or Mac filesystems. Your shared folders are accessed through your Windows network places, and function like mounted network folders. Sometimes I have to copy files over in order to get them to work properly, because of network permissions problems created by my Linux host. Host means the OS on which I'm running the emulator.

Setting up a Windows install in VirtualBox on a Mac is very similar to setting it up on Linux, and it's also an easy way to access Linux development tools on your Mac desktop.

Google's Blogger Template Designer + Chrome: The love, the love, the love

Guess what folks? Web design has changed again. This time it's for the better.

RIP (gradually):

• Dreamweaver
• Coda
• FTP

Don't worry, long live: HTML & CSS.

Hello and welcome to my new favourite web publishing environment:

• DOM inspector with editable CSS + preview
• Blogger Template Designer

Here's how you (ANYBODY) make yourself a website from now on:

1. Get Google Chrome.
2. Start a Blogger Blog.
3. Use the Template Designer (pictured above) to pick a template, background images, colours, fonts etc.
4. If you know CSS, right/ctrl-click on something you want to change, and pick "inspect element."
5. Because you're in preview mode, Blogger will select the "clicktrap" thing. Make it go away by unchecking the "height: 100%" or something on the right. Now you're free.
6. Do it again: right-click on whatever you want to change, use the DOM inspector to select what you want to select, then try double-clicking on one of the CSS attributes. It will apply your edits in the browser! If you double-click just to the left of the attribute list, it inserts a new property or whatever it's called, and you can throw in a new value. So you can preview and code CSS at the same time.
7. When your CSS for that element is perfect, go to "add css" at the bottom of the list in the "advanced" thing in the Template Designer, copy and paste the selector of the element you're editing, and copy and paste the CSS from the DOM inspector!

This changes the price point of basic websites! Now they're actually affordable to the people who need them made. This is a big turning point in cheap websites.

glory from compression!

I'm working with Ocean Island's current designer, Mike, on the redesign of their site, and I'm thinking a lot about .jpg and .gif compression. I've started to think about what doesn't agree with compression algorithms.

Essentially, JPEG compression responds well to graphics with similar and photographic patterns. Graphics that contain a larger variation of random shapes end up with larger file sizes, the way that graphics with too wide a colour palette end up presenting troubles for .gif compression.

So here's some ideas:

Put together a layout that takes jpeg's good compression for colour-rich and smooth graphics, and gif's good compression for limited colour palettes, bizarre patterns, etc. And it'd be nice to do design that works with the compression artifacts that each present. Plus it'd be nice to understand PNG.

Yay!

PS

In addition, it'd be fun to put something together that takes advantage of all sorts of browser-specific functions, but that work independently of each-other, so it looks different in every browser, but good in all browsers. Take advantage of that weirdness. Perhaps there's sites that'd be good without usability concerns at all.

The Mars exploration site's got problems? Holy moly!

It's hard to believe that somebody would make this kind of mistake on the Mars Exploration website, but yeah, the flash thing totally doesn't do anything when you click one of the "click to view" something links. This shows how even when loads of money is thrown at a web design job, massive problems can still slip through the cracks, without proper testing. In this case, the cheapest of usability tests or a heuristic audit would have revealed the problem.

The moral of the story? Don't make it slick if you can't make it click.

UPDATE: Sometime between 2011 and 2013, this problem was solved, because the interactive thing I was referring to was removed. It was replaced with a virtual tour that's so ghetto, you'd have to travel with it back in time at least a decade to find someone who'd be impressed by it. But it does seem to work.