Friday, April 9, 2010

A Question For You All

Hey everyone,

I wanted to talk about something that I realized recently, something that I thought was rather interesting. But first, I want to give you some context:

The other day I was working very hard on a video I was making for a business that I co-founded. This video had taken several days to pull together and, thanks to GarageBand and iMovie '09, was seeing major setbacks. Confusing interfaces, a lack of features, and a frequent corruption of files lead me to near hair-pulling instances of frustration.

Realistically, this video should have taken less than a day. It's relatively short, requires no actual filming (just voiceover), and a comparatively small amount of editing. But no.

The situation came to a head when my GarageBand file, containing the voiceover, became corrupted for the 3rd time. This effectively wiped half of my recording and scrambled the rest into a bass-ackward garble. On top of that, the program I was using to edit the visual portion, iMovie '09, had, itself, a somewhat ridiculous interface and was missing a lot of the features I had come to know and love. I'd had enough at this point. Remembering back to my highschool days, and the film class I took therein, I recalled a specific program that was simple and easy, but still allowed for a high degree of customization. iMovie HD 6. Arguably the highest point in the iMovie-chronology. (Which, I suppose, isn't saying much, since there ARE a number of programs out there faaar better than iMovie. I had just grown attached to it growing up and knew its features so well already that it was the first place I turned to.)

Now that is a relatively old program we're talking about. I recalled, at one point, Apple giving away free downloads of it to owners of iMovie '08 (another, if you will excuse me, piece of crap). I hurredly checked the Apple support site for any trace of it, but discovered it had been taken down long ago. I didn't know where to turn, and I had lost my own copy of iLife '06 ages past.

Well, it took me an hour, but eventually I found it. It was still being hosted -- legally, I might add. And, despite the fact that this accomplishment was not that big of a deal, I was very excited. I then sat down and over the course of 6 or so hours, re-recorded every piece of dialogue, edited every piece of video and had the whole thing finished and done, rewarding myself with sleep at 6 AM.

But, having gone through all of this -- something I am sure many others have -- it led me to think.. is it just me, or are a number of older technologies actually better than what is on the market now?

To provide examples: you have people complaining about Windows Vista and Windows 7 vs. Windows XP, or -- as above -- about iMovie HD 6 vs. newer versions. Even hardware, such as the recent iPad, have come under fire. Some people seem to think that these newer technologies and programs lack any progressive improvements, or are just plain needless, while others argue that they represent the future of the field, and will take time to be integrated into society to the point where they're generally accepted.

I mean, sure, there have been "radical" ideas in the past that, when actually used by people, soon became commonplace. I can only imagine how cars, televisions, or computers were first received in their initial developments. Branching out further, this applies to many areas of pop culture. Such as the Beatles, early in their career, being turned down for a record label because "groups with guitars are on their way out".

Sometimes it is hard to predict exactly how things will turn out, or how a given influence or technology will impact society, until you actually see its effects bear out with time. Even in the context of past events, it can still be tricky, since civilization is always changing, and the attitudes of a given populace can vary greatly from generation to generation.


So I now leave it up to you, where do you stand? Please, do post up and tell me your opinion, I am interested in seeing what the consensus on this subject is.



Until next Friday,

Vince Caso

13 comments:

  1. I had actually noticed the somewhat uselessness of newer techologies, that seemed to be more concerned with perks and giving buyers a sense of status, but I had never associated them with older technologies, that I will agree, are more useful and efficient.
    About the bigger picture, I think it is just about taking a leap of faith and, regardless of how they will be received, telling the world about your ideas/beliefs, and just trusting that someone will think they are brilliant. (Because, chances are, someone will).
    Also, I think that with any "radical" ideas (well received or not), the way they were received directly depends on when they were developed, and who heard about them.

    These might all be extremely naive insights, but maybe you'll find them interesting. :)

    - Ezra

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree. When you take a good look at it, it can often boil down to a touch of greed. Forsaking quality for speed of production, to make a quicker buck.

    It's sad, but a lot of companies have that mindset, and the technologies and advances of a generation can be a direct index of it.


    Vince

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hey Vince, it's awesome you have a new blog!

    About this subject, I also believe not-so-older technologies are better than newer ones.

    For example, my Nintendo64. It has never, ever malfununctioned. Let's analyze this. Variety of games is good, multiplayer capability up to 4 persons, data storage inside cartidges, what else do you want?

    ReplyDelete
  4. Exactly!

    I think part of it may also be just laziness. Making a "better" edition of something old, but not really improving it any. But, they know people will buy it out of some kind of routine. Also because of the status part I mentioned before.

    Ezra

    ReplyDelete
  5. New technology is often hit or miss. Sometimes a lot of great ideas come together in an awful way because who ever designed the interface was careless, or sometimes the interface is just fine but who ever came up with the list of features to include was in a hurry. *coughcoughWINDOWSMOVIEMAKERcoughcough*

    Maybe people just took software more seriously in the past when it was a fascinating new business. Now any old company can just churn out crap software any time. I know what you are talking about, though.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I definitely know what you're talking about it seems the newer version of older things just have a new interface and somethings switched around. You could say that the new things are superfluous but some things that don't serve much of a practical purpose (iPad) could just be carriers for testing a new technology (the onscreen keyboard or something like that) and they may all be put together to finally create something very new USEFUL technology. But then again what does it matter anyway? If you don't like something, you don't have to buy it. I don't know why but I keep thinking about the differences in views on advancements between Plato's philosophy (for the common good) and Spinoza's philosophy (egoism- ex Bill Gates)

    ReplyDelete
  7. My last comment was in response to Vince's, by the way.

    Ezra

    ReplyDelete
  8. Good to hear so many ideas entering in, here! I'm glad you guys think along similar lines.

    Keep it going, if anyone else has anything to say feel free to!


    Vince

    ReplyDelete
  9. Many times, technology goes down a wrong path, not because of greed or haste, but because of imperfect knowledge of the user experience. Most developers I know never go out to make a bad product intentionally. We sometimes end up there, however, because of some disconnect between the developer and the user. Maybe we should have conducted better usability studies up front or be quicker to respond to usability issues when they come up. On the other hand, we can only build what we can with the resources at hand. If there is nothing in a project's budget for usability, for example, then the developers and/or testers become the only arbiters of the user experience. Most of the time, however, we are not the target users.

    ReplyDelete
  10. They do this so they end up with more money in the end. They make it sound so grand that people think they have to have one. Then they see it has problems, then they complian and a new one comes out so they buy that and so on.

    ReplyDelete
  11. @Kevin Seedorf: Firstly, I love my N64 dearly, but the thing always spazzes on me. Remember blowing on the cartridges? (that's probably my favorite memory growing up) It's more like nostalgia and the simplicity that draws me to the games.

    Secondly, all of this has to do with our competitive consumerist society demanding new and better. A program should be the best it can be when they put it out on the market, but if this is true, what drives a company to come out with a new product? Consumers demanding new and going with the competitor's product over the outdated program.

    ReplyDelete
  12. I think that at any point in time, both junk and really awesome stuff get made...but the good stuff sticks in our memories (and sometimes even sticks around) while the bad will eventually fade away or get replaced. Meanwhile, there will probably be a larger ratio of junk to good stuff out there and visible to us at any point of time that is the present. But yes, there will always be the brand name stuff that is sold solely on the basis of it's name, the stuff made that has no real purpose other than it somehow became a fad, and things that you see on infomercials. Thank God there are also companies out there like the one working on a solar airship to replace airplanes (very environmentally friendly, and low cost to run) and the one working on a tattoo digital skin display running on blood sugar (this would be so great for diabetics). Less noble and actually currently existing, I really do prefer my LCD screens to the old CRT.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Great comments, all around, I'm glad we're able to have this sort of discussion. I've seen great points raised. :)


    Vince

    ReplyDelete