Noisy Decent Graphics

Balloon thing: good or annoying?

So this balloon thing, good or annoying?

I've wasted a decent amount of time playing it today and I've had fun. I was even 5th at one point! But I can totally understand that it's very annoying seeing all those balloons when you arrive at this site.

On the internet some people seem a little confused by it (I was at first) and some people seem very annoyed with it all. What do you think?

I've made a list of what I think are good and bad points.

Good
It's genuinely fun when you start playing. It takes a while to get into it but once you do it's quite addictive. And I've never seen anything like it before.

It doesn't seem impossible. A lot of online competitions feel like you've got absolutely no chance of winning, this one doesn't feel like that.

The techie stuff is very, very clever. If you stop and think - what they're doing is pretty amazing and it's being done well and pretty slickly too.

It looks gorgeous. By that I mean the craft, the edges of the balloons, the little balloon loading bar, the detail on the strings - all fantastically well done.

Bad
There's no getting round the fact that basically it's annoying when you visit a site you love and all these balloons are there. I know you can click it off and I like it when I'm playing the game, but it's not hard to envisage people getting annoyed at this.

It's a little clunky. I mean a teeny, weeny, weeny bit clunky. Because what they're trying to pull off is so complex I can forgive a bit of clunkyness. But still, the clunk is there.

Sometimes it repeats that "your balloon has left this site" thing twice. I refer to my point above.

There's my site with a token on it!

I've had some decent traffic from playballoonacy.com today and I'm not writing this so that people from Orange or Poke come on and defend Ballloonacy.

I'd just like to know whether you, my beloved listeners, find the balloons annoying on this site. Should I take them off?

"Sorry, I'm not txting, I'm taking notes"

This a picture of my Rodchenko notes, my meeting notes are all a bit longer but a bit more confidential.

In my continual quest to become uber organised, I have recently ditched Moleskine's in favour of note taking on my Jesus Phone.

This has several advantages.
1. Less stuff to carry around.
2. When it's done, it's done. No typing up the notes.
3. You can email the meeting notes to the client as you leave the building. When they arrive back at their desk, it's in their inbox. Trust me, this impresses clients.

The only problem is that I have to start every meeting with "Sorry, I'm not txting, I'm taking notes" which makes me sound like a wally.

Super-cali-Adi-flickr-licious

The other day as part of my Flickr 366 thing I posted this picture, taken in our production meeting.

Then in the recent activity thing in Flickr I noticed that Adi Dassler had added it as a favourite.

That's a little odd, isn't it? Here's Adi's Flickr profile.

And here's some more of his favourites. All adidas related obviously.

Adi happens to be dead, so it's not him. It could be a sneakerhead. Or it could be some adidas marketing department, but they've spelt adidas with a capital A and that's a big no no in the adidas marketing department.

So anyway. As you were.

Decibel Monitoring Poster

I liked this poster on spotted on the Shoreditch Twoway the other morn.

It's an advert for quiet fridges or sommits and it features a digital decibel monitor which measures the sound live on the Shoreditch Twoway. It was 64 decibels for most of the time I looked at it, but it rose to 99 when a police car sped past. Good fun.

NT Interactive Screens

A little while ago the NT had this interactive screen in the foyer.

It was good. Not earth shattering, it's like a big iPhone, but I learnt more about the play than I've ever done from a poster. More pictrs on Flickr.

Unpackaged visit

I went to Unpackaged the other day. John Grant and many others have talked about Unpackaged before, but briefly, it's a shop where all the stuff they sell has no packaging.

I'll admit I was hugely sceptical. It just sounds like some twee, middle England, poncey London, greenwashing fest. After all, anyone can sell this sort of stuff with no packaging.

But I'm pleased to report it's a lot, lot better than that. Sure - it's small and it's expensive, but it's also brilliant. And it looks great.

Those little boxes hold flour and nuts and dried banana skins and what not. They're all designed to be easy to clean, even the tags can be wiped clean and reused for another product. That's good sensible design.

So you bring your own bag / box / jar and you save 50p. They will even refill olive oil bottles, which is pretty impressive.

There are some things they can't unpackage yet. Ecover won't give them a great big vat of washing up liquid for example, but you can leave all the packaging there for recycling. I understand this is common practice in Germany?

There's lots of great little ideas here. Yes, it needs to be bigger (in size and scale) and it needs to be cheaper to have a big effect, but it's a great start and it's a glimpse of how things could be. Surely all packaging designers should (nowadays) start with the goal of having no packaging and then work backwards from there?

More pictures on Flickr.

UPDATE: Catherine Conway from Unpackaged has just emailed me to clarify a few points.

Firstly (and importantly) the shop was designed by Multistorey

Secondly she's asked me to correct an inaccuracy,

"you mention that some things can’t be unpackaged- the Ecover example is wrong as they do provide us with vats of cleaning products" "most people buy it [Ecover] in refills from us." "an example of something we can’t unpackage currently would be cotton wool or toothpaste."

We also had a little discussion about what I meant by expensive. Cath says, "The question of whether it’s expensive is a moot point- our prices compare pretty favourably with like for like products (organic, fair trade) in supermarkets but are obviously more expensive than their value counterparts…"

I guess I should have been clearer. What I really mean is that for an unpackaged concept to be adopted across the whole country it would have to cater for the people that shop in Iceland as well. Do you know what I mean?

Anyway. Happy to clear all that up.

Little ideas adapted by big companies

Here's a nice little idea. No big fanfare, it won't win any awards, but I just saw it and thought it was good.

If you're out and about. At a friends house for dinner or sommits. And you think think, ooh that was a nice bottle of wine I'll have to remember what that was called. Except you won't remember, because you're a bit tipsy and you've got better things to be remembering.

Now that problem is solved. You simply tear off this little reminder. I always thought those notices you see in Universities with the little tear off strips cut into the bottom were a brilliant idea. It looks like someone has adapted this for Oxford Landing. I could imagine innocent using this. I bet people would collect those little labels.

In fact, that's one of my favourite types of ideas. One that just builds over time and then gets adapted by a business or an organsiation. A bit like those paths people make when they take the direct route through a park, rather than the badly designed route the developers have made. But that's another post.

Things you should be reading

Morning.

Right, today you should read this by Iain. It's good and Iain knows what he's talking about. You should also read this (admittedly slightly fluffy) article on the Beeb about airport design. "Ten minutes in a horrible space can feel like half an hour but in a nice space can pass relatively fast."

You should then read this article tantalisingly called Secrets of UX Design Productivity from Google, it seems that "Google is in the process of getting great ideas produced quickly" which is no bad thing. Lastly read this article in the Harvard Business Review about a Japanese bank's new IT system which was developed using the path method. As you'd imagine it's a bit heavy going in parts, but it's interesting and there are the makings of some good lessons, "firms should not have to sell new systems to users; rather they should build systems that users willingly embrace".

Well, it's an honor.

It really is, just to be typing here.

some beholders are blind.

But lately, my mind is thinking more towards design authority.
"Beauty... eye of beholder... yadda, yadda... "

But there are some things that always look good. And some that almost always, don't.

• When you randomly mix centered text with left justified headers and/or body text... I mean, unless you're doing it a lot, consistently, because thats what you're going for.
• Comic Sans
• "Let's just make all of this in bold... "
• "Can we also put this other paragraph on the business card?"

My mind isn't as full of examples at midnight... but there are some principles that good design consists of... and principles that CAN be broken... intentionally---and STRONGLY broken, that can create a provocative, strong design as well...

But those principles (contrast, eyeflow, whitespace, borders, justifications, wise color choice, line length)... they are there for a reason. They help designs be good- er-- well--whatever. They make design better and more effective, webpage, flyer, or buswrap.

And the trouble is, clients, or worse, bosses, can sometimes be more degree-d and trained in business or marketing or whatever, and their position affords them the luxury of coercing you to break those principles for their whim or fancy, or worse yet, for a client's proposal. And not in a strong, edgy, provocative way. In a way that makes you wish you could forget that it was technically your mouse and keyboard, and servitude that made it that way.

Here's to sticking to your guns. design backbone. designing with integrity of principles.

thanks for the wonderful RSS. this lowly designer/ web maintenance guy in Florida has been enjoying the lessons and interesting posts for over 2 years now. keep it up!

http://www.drewplaysdrums.com

Part of All Request Thursday

Signal Failure?

At first glance I love these.

Picture taken from Laughing In The Face, usual rules apply.

It seems like a good idea and the graphic designer in me loves the arrows on the floor. Arrows on every floor I reckon. But anyway, this is the new attempt by TfL to get people to stand nicely to one side and let the passengers off. The Creative Review Blog has a good post and some great pictures here.

What I like most is that they're trying out four different designs and seeing which one works. This is a great idea. It's very rare for graphic design to measured and even rarer for it to be measured properly. But it's not just that, isn't trying out four designs just a good idea? A focus group would have been terrible, complicated and expensive. Someone at the top could have just made a decision but then you'd be relying on one person's opinion. Trying out four solutions is cheap, quick, practical and sensible.

I'm all for sensible design solutions.

Picture taken from the Creative Review Blog, usual rules apply. I can't seem to find out who took the picture. Sorry.

The CR Blog raised some interesting points in the comments. Our own Alex said, "I think this is a great idea and well needed here in London". But then Alistair pointed out, "Since people seem unable to use even the most basic levels of common sense (and manners) to realise that standing clear of the doors and letting the passengers off first is the best way to do things, are they really going to pay any attention at all to some floor graphics?" Which is a very valid point. Maybe us designers are just getting carried away?

Patrick then pointed out, "Myself, Mark and Eliza from CR got on the Jubilee Line at Waterloo last night. Most people were obediently standing outside the white lines."

Which made me wonder just how they're going to be measured? Surely the only way to do it is with an old fashioned human being. And that's got to be more than a bit subjectve? "Only one person was standing on the yellow lines, so I considered this to be a success". And how long do you measure it for? And how often do you measure?

When I did some measurement earlier today at Waterloo, it didn't seem to be working. Not at all.

Maybe we should all measure it? Every time you use the Jubilee line take a picture and then we can start to see if we can see any patterns? Would anyone be up for that?

Data, Branding, Web Design, Pouring Acid Into My Eyeballs and What Graphic Design Is For.

There have been about 3 posts in my drafts folder for ages. And then today, like Paul on the road to Damascus they've all come together in one delightful little package.

Let's start with data.

Everyone is very excited about data right now. Data is everywhere. Google are to blame for quite a lot of it, but so are things like the Freedom Of Information Act, the Internet, Andy Gray, Sky Sports and a whole bunch of other stuff we call the Information Age. Nothing new there.

Just look at the watch in that photo.

Except that now we're starting to see this data used and reused and repackaged and (crucially) redesigned in lots of different ways. Redesigned in sexy ways, redesigned in innovative ways and redesigned in different ways to suit different audiences. Same info, different look.

Lets take a look at one of my favourite examples of this. On One Map.

That site uses a Google Map and pulls in data from estate agent's websites and Government statistics. It can tell me there's a 2 bed flat for sale for £895k and four mobile phone masts 400ft from the office. All of this data is (sort of) freely available. I'm no Property Geek but what I love most about this site is how you can search for a new house by visible map rather than funny drop down boxes. So you can look for properties near Drury Lane rather than searching for <1-2 bed> <£500k-£1000k> <flat>. That map is a much more intuitive, easy to understand device.

There are some absolutely fabulous examples of data being redesigned in all sorts of ways over here so I'll steal a few of them below.

All data that's freely available to you or me. But it's not just online. Take a look at these gorgeous data representations from Global Cities exhibition.

That's just some boring stats made to into a must see 3D thing.

And here's a film of Lisa Strausfield's model of downtown Manhattan in action.

It's just data. But incredibly beautiful.

So, effectively you can now get your data styled however you like. This is a huge step and has massive implications for designers.

Let's take something as ubiquitous as Google Maps. You could (nowadays) have a widget that printed off your map in the same style as an A-Z for Black Cabbies, in the style of a Beck Tube Map for Graphic Design Geeks and in the style of the Alliance to Restore the Republic for Sci Fi fans. That is not only possible, it's probable.

Where the users of Dopplr went last year. Borrowed from Matt Jones.

So this changes the game a little bit for designers and brand owners, because you could easily end up losing control. You might not want your data redesigned as a Tube map. But you can't stop this stuff happening so what do you do?

Obviously some brands (and designs, branding work etc) are already kitted out for this world.

Here's a simple example; imagine some copy from an innocent bottle written in a light serif font and then written again in a heavy mock Western font. Visually that would give off a totally different vibe, right? Yet it would still be unmistakably innocent.

Likewise, The Economist can shoe horn that red and white into just about any form of media and (love it or hate it) it's still The Economist.

Orange - if they'd stuck closer to the path they started on - would now be the complete masters at this. Visual style, colour, tone of voice, it would all be set up in one orange pixel.

Becuase what we're talking about is proper branding. The kind of branding Wally Olins spoke about at the RSA in the 70's.

So it might be possible control the output of this data by cleverly structuring, or designing, the data in the first place. (Governments are good at this - all those expensive inquiries where the 'terms of reference' are so narrow only one answer is ever going to be found.)

But we're seeing this in more immediate, less expensive areas too. The humble RSS feed is a great example of how users can design your content however they want.

Some people say MySpace is "like pouring acid into your eyeballs" but what if it's just design by, err, non designers? Or is it design by a committee of 24 million? Whatever it is it's a trend and you're gonna see more of it. Take a look at this brilliantly comprehensive post by Michael Johnson on flexible identity schemes. Don't tell me that in at least one of those meetings someone didn't ask for "a MySpace"?

But it's not just data and identity it's the web too. Have you tried designing a website recently? Those things just won't stay still.

I was talking to someone the other day about the difference between print design and web design and I listed three things that are true for print design but not true for web design.

In print design you control the experience.

In print design everyone has the same experience.

In print design history is a reliable guide.

These things just aren't true in web design. People have different browsers, different screens, different font sizes. The conventions change from one month to the next, what worked last year doesn't work this year. Peole don't start at the start. There is no start. And so on and so on.

Designers have been told to worry about this for years, but only now is this era truly upon us.

In fact it seems to me we're going back to what graphic designers were originally intended for - wading through information and making it easier for people to take in. That's the difference between a designer and someone who just makes stuff look good.

That's what designers have always been doing until everyone went a bit of track in the eighties and nineties (can you ever imagine David Carson wading through information and making it easier for people to take in?). Mabye the information age is helping bring back some purpose to design. Read this article about the redesign of the US road signage to see how valuable clarity in design is.

Which leads me on to one of my favourite things - hierarchies. Every good designer should be able to design a great hierarchy. Almost every piece of communication will be improved by a good hierarchy.

But I've probably bored you all now. Hierarchies will be another day.

The Next Issue

I got this magazine the other day. It's called The Next Issue.

It's not just a magazine it's a whole new thing. "The Future Department (who have but together The Next Issue) is a growing network of interesting people from disparate creative and business disciplines. The Next Issue is their magazine."

Now, I'm aware all that above sounds like total bollocks. But it isn't.

Firstly The Future Department  / The Next Issue is run by Alex West. Alex is a clever, hard working, and unbelievably well connected bloke (he used to organise the Future Marketing Summit).

Secodly the networky bit means you can connect with an amazing (and I really mean that) bunch of people across the globe (and I really mean that). But there'll be more about that later.

Thirdly the magazine has articles by John Maeda, Will Alsop, Anomaly, The Sag, Digit, Imagination and Taxi. All good, very good people. It's also available as a PDF. I think the idea is to end up with just a PDF or some digital format. Click on The Future Department above for the online version.

I'd said I would write something but I didn't get round to it. Kicking myself now. Which reminds me of a bloke I know who once told me that he'd been invited to sit on a panel at the Royal College of Art. He turned up for the first panel but didn't bother for the second. He missed the third session and then he received a letter saying they'd kicked him off the panel. From that day on he vowed two things; to never accept a place on a panel unless he knew he was able to make every meeting and to take things he'd volunteered for seriously. Good advice.

The digital world is your friend

That is a picture of me, watching a video I downloaded from the internet of my brother giving a talk at a conference in Las Vegas, on my iPod, on a train journey to Maidenhead.

That's good isn't it? The digital world, my friends, is your friend.

(I'm also reading a horrendous supplement about design that I shall hopefully write about later.)

Tangible digital

This is just an expression that I want to store here so that I don't forget it. That is all.

Maybe I'm cool now?

I've never really been into MTV. I never watched it as a kid, in fact I don't think I've ever 'watched' it. It's been on a few times when I've been round other peoples houses.

The other night Marcus twittered that he was watching "probably the best MTV EMA ever" so I thought I'd have a look and see if it was streamed live online.

And blow me down it was.



So I watched it for a bit. Streaming. Big. Good quality. And I got to see Amy Winehouse sing 'Rehab' which was good because I'd actually quite fancied watching that bit.



And the graphics were pretty good too.



Ahhhhhh... the internet.

Good Design

Picture from UPPERCASE found via Russell's FFFFound! Usual stuff applies.

Is this the definitive description of good design?

Discuss.

The Visual Dictionary

Visual and Dictionary by MINORBUG, used with thanks, usual stuff applies.

This does that brilliant thing of pulling together, building on and bundling up in a nice url all those things you'd been trying or meaning to do. The web is great at that.

The Visual Dictionary does what it says on the tin. A dictionary of 3000 single words all represent by a photo of that word. Presentations will never be the same again. Is this the new clip art?

Put together by Matthew Knight.

Brilliant by Flicko used with thanks, usual stuff applies.

Noisy Decent Graphics iPhone Exclusive

Fully Charged

This is one of the best ideas I've seen in a long time.

We rented an apartment in Barcelona last month and the owner included this basket full of every mobile charger you could ever wish for. All with Spanish plugs, obviously.

I've lost count of the amount of times I've been abroad, or even away from home in the UK, and forgotten my charger. It feels like part of you has died when that little battery finally gives up the ghost.

Six years ago, at the Edinburgh Festival I saw a mobile phone charging unit by Orange.  It was like a series of small swimming pool lockers. You paid a pound, took a wristband key and you could leave your phone charging in a secure environment. Brilliant. No more forgetting, or even if you've remembered no more carrying, that bloody lead. I thought I'd soon see them everywhere, but I never saw another one. Have you ever seen one?

The other day at the D&AD judging I saw one of these. It's not the same, but it's very similar. It may even be the same company that makes them.

Don't you think it's a good idea? I can imagine them in office receptions, at train stations and airports throughout the land.

Why I don't like Monocle

Everyone seems to like Monocle, and that's fine. But I don't.

I haven't been so excited about the launch of a magazine for sometime. I was a big fan of the original Wallpaper and Tyler Brulé was due another hit. I rushed out to buy it when it launched and brought into the office under a big fanfare.

And there it sat. Unloved and apart from the obligatory 'new magazine in the office flick through' unopened.

I've tried to think a bit harder than normal about why I don't like Monocle and I reckon I've found 3 reasons.

1. It's not the magazine I wanted.
2. It's a magazine.
3. It's not as good as the website.

1. It's not the magazine I wanted.
But then again no magazine is these days. I've always loved and read lots of magazines. When I was about 12 I used to read Look-In, Smash Hits, Q Magazine, For Him Magazine (when it was called For Him Magazine and every issue looked like a Ralph Lauren catalogue) and Vogue. I've always loved Vogue. 

That stayed broadly the same until just before university when Loaded launched. They launched with a picture of Gary Oldman on the front. Fully clothed. And no fluro anywhere.

From here on and throughout university I read a pretty stereotypical mix of Loaded, FHM, GQ, Esquire and Arena. With the occasional Vogue, Wired, Elle, Elle Decoration and Q thrown in. And of course The Face.

This was in the days when Loaded was brilliant and innovative, when FHM had (some) class and GQ and Arena still had men on the front.

As the 'lad mags' and the 'mens mags' descended into their fluro orange tit and bum hell I began to look for an alternative. Wallpaper fitted the gap nicely.

As I started work I, obviously, began to take the trade mags more seriously, Creative Review, Design Week, Campaign as well as Wallpaper, Elle Decoration, American Esquire (which is very different to UK Esquire), Fast Company and still Vogue and still Q. And of course The Face.

Then one day I got all serious and bought a copy of The Economist.

I loved it. It was simple, it was clever and it explained things in a nice way. It also had a pace about it that I liked. So I subscribed.

I read a left over copy of GQ on the plane the other day. I hated it. It felt so patronising - I was surprised at how angry I got over being told what watch to buy or what coat to wear. Obviously your tastes change as you move through different stages in your life and you don't need to be AC Nielsen to realise that the above list reflects that. Broadly speaking I was reading about my interests.

So what am I interested in now?

Design, Graphic Design, politics, greenish stuff, football (as long as it's warm and I've got a good view), the world (usual stuff like Iraq, the Middle East, Europe), being a Dad, business, running a business, what Google and Apple are up to. Technology (as long as it's the kind of technology that means I don't have to wear a tshirt with a technology logo on it) films (and I mean films, never ever DVD's), art, culture and, well, that will do won't it?

So what magazine covers all of that? None of them do, certainly Monocle doesn't. But the web does.

2. It's a magazine.
Monocle is a magazine, but it feels like a bloody Thompson directory. It weighs a ton.

(Picture borrowed from Russell Davies and then adapted by me, usual stuff applies)

I love the cover(s) and I love the black and white idea. When you open it up, bits of it are well designed. But it's still full of those horrible magazine clichés - zillions of Gucci ads before you get to the index, for example. Remember when Wallpaper used to redesign ads before they would print them?

The size really does put me off. Whereas The Economist feels light and friendly, Monocle feels like I'll get told off if I don't read the whole thing before I buy the next one.

I guess the true continuation of the reading list above is that I now get all the same information from the web. For news (political, financial and world) it's the BBC, for work I still read Creative Review but I prefer the CR Blog, Design Observer and a whole bunch of blogs.

For the odd football story there's the BBC again, but I also now look at nearly all the UK newspapers online everyday. I can also check up on IHT, Chicago Tribune and the NYT online. And so on.

So that's my magazine now. It's called the web.

3. It's not as good as the website.
Monocle has a website, Dan (not that Dan) has being talking about it for a while.

The website is brilliant. Gorgeous. Whereas I hate the ads at the start of the print version, I love the Rolex clocks on the homepage of the website. In fact it's so much better than the magazine that it puts me off buying the magazine.

Let me give you an example. On the front cover of Monocle Issue 1 is a great picture of a man in a helmet. I looked at it loads, but never wondered what it was. From the website I found out that it's a member of the Japanese Air Force.

Since the end of the Second World War the Japanese have only been allowed to have a defensive army, and now 60 years on that's beginning to look a bit out of date. Monocle travelled to Japan and interviewed various members of the Japanese army. I found that out because there was an animated slide show about the article on the website.

I could have read that in the magazine. But I didn't. And that's sort of my point really.

Making a profit and being ethical

I went to an Economist lecture at the RSA once. It was about how the Victorians started the Limited Company.

By Limited Company they meant PLC and Ltd. As in PLC which is a Public Limited Company like Sainsbury's or as in Ltd which is a private Limited company like us. The lecture highlighted that the sole purpose of a limited company has always been a legal vehicle to make a profit. That's it.

There are many other legal vehicles for doing stuff, or getting things done, in a business-like-way. Trusts, partnerships, sole traders and charities to name a few. But a limited company - that's just for making a profit. Nothing wrong with making money. But that leads you to think that all Limited Companies are set up with the main goal of making a profit. Obviously.

I preface this because yesterday I was thinking of a question for Russell's Howies thing but it coincides with some other thoughts I've been having.

I suppose we're entering an age where companies that have built their images on their "ethicalness" are reaching a crossroads. From the Bodyshop through Howies and Innocent etc. The problem I suppose is a bit like when a politician declares himself 'whiter than white', you're setting yourself up for a fall. Aren't you?

The Bodyshop tried being a PLC, Howies have sold a stake to Timberland and Innocent remain vocally independent.

Does making a play on your "ethicalness" raise unreasonable expectations in the mind of the consumer? Does it matter? What if Innocent decided they wanted to sell to, say Virgin. Not some "obvious brand pariah" like Coca Cola.

What would be wrong with that? What if they everything stayed the same, all the ethical stuff was still there, the founders got a  nice pay day and they were part of a bigger group. Anyone got a problem with that? I'm sure some people would.

I have no answers. It's just a bridge some of these new brands will have to cross.

So, my question to Howies is; The line "cardigan bay's 3rd biggest clothing company" is brilliant, charming and has served you well. Post Timberland will that now change? (And that wasn't supposed to sound as Question Time as it reads.)

A handy text

I got sent this text message the other day.

Handyman is an absolutely brilliant service. It's a bit like a Rent A Dad service for lazy city dwellers. They're handymen on scooters who'll come round and fix the annoying little jobs that you can't do or can't be bothered to do. Small things, like fixing a loose cupboard door, fitting a plasma screen, new lights or putting up some Ikea stuff. Things you wouldn't need a builder or an electrician for. Things you'd ask your Dad to do if he lived next door.

Like a lot of new businesses they've got loads of cool ideas. For a start they all use scooters so they can move quick. All the handymen have their picture on the website so you can see who's going to pop round - which is reassuring. They're not cheap but they're good and efficient.

I've used them before which is why I got the text message. I didn't have any jobs for them but I admit I was racking my brains. After just moving office I think 10% off is a seriously good offer.

Back to the text message. Isn't this a good idea? Let's say they have got some bookings in the area, a couple at 9am, 10am, 4pm and 5pm. Doesn't it make sense to try and fill the gaps? Such an low intrusion way to send this information out. Seeing as I'm already a customer I don't mind the text. And it's cheap too.

Good show.

Two brilliant pieces of graphic design

Two brilliant pieces of graphic design from the Khoi and the gang at the New York Times.

I've been meaning to link to the first one for a while. It's called Faces Of The Dead. Each member of the US Services who has died in Iraq is represented by a pixel sized square. When you click on a square, and therefore a name, the pixels form that person's face.

It's very well done, sensitive, interesting and a powerful way of representing some powerful statistics that we normally just see as lists or numbers. It's graphic design at it's best.

The second one from the same people is a pictorial representation of the key words used in all Bush's State Of The Union addresses. You can highlight keywords and see how often he mentioned that each year. You can pick obvious key words like Iraq or Terror or you can search for more obscure terms - like design, which he said 3 times in 2003. Again it's very well done. Sensitive, powerful and elegant.

What I like about both of these, but particularly the last one, is how they take important, dry information and make it accessible and interesting to a wide audience. The design helps the comprehension of the information rather than hindering it.

And it's exactly the sort of thing newspapers ought to be doing online.

Identity 2.0

Another thing I've had kicking around for ages and forgotten to write about.

It's a video of a presentation by a chap called Dick Hardt which he terms Identity 2.0. Don't let that put you off.


It's all about the concept of digital identity. It's really good. Clever. A refreshing presentation style. As it says on the blurb, "I watched it twice, and greatly enjoyed it both times.". 

This is the new That

Brilliant and lovely. Taken from thediagram.com with many thanks. Via Design Observer. If you follow thediagram.com link you can see a much bigger version.

The best organisation of the information to aid the communication

This post and this post from Russell have made me think of another reason why the iPhone is so brilliant.

(Picture from the Darth Strategist, with thanks, usual stuff counts)

Yawn, yawn, another Mac fan saying how brilliant the iPhone is. Yes - but listen to these comments from one of those posts about the design of remote controls.

"you realise that remotes would be much better if they could evolve to highlight the buttons you regularly use"

"they should do a "big button" version so that grandparents who can't see so well and have arthritic fingers can use it. That goes for mobile phones too"

"Maybe they should supply his and hers remote controls"

"Why oh why are there no user intuitive remote controls?"

This is exactly what the iPhone will be able to do. The folksonomy of button design, if you like. It could learn which features you use most and only display those buttons.

(Picture taken from Apple, obviously. Usual stuff applies but I'm sure they won't mind. Especially as I'm about to give them $600.)

The best design organises information in the most useful way, but makes that organisation look seemless and elegant. Think Underground map. Not cartographically correct, but the best organisation of the information to aid the communication. That's what the iPhone should be able to do. That's great usability.

I once bought my Mum a calculator from the Early Learning Centre. Why? She kept complaining the screen and the buttons were too small on her calculator.

With an iPhone you could tell it you were 90 and struggling with the buttons and then you could download a bigger set of buttons through iTunes. How simple is that?

Etcetera.

And that is revolutionary. Now you might be thinking, 'yeah yeah, it's not that clever, anyone could have done it'.  Anyone hasn't got the iTunes infrastructure that Apple has. Anyone hasn't got the consumer confidence. And anyone hasn't done it. And as we keep saying it's all in the doing. Which is why everyone has phones designed like this.

(Picture of Steve Jobs talking about 'not so smart phones' at the iPhone launch, from Engadget, thanks chaps