Rant: They Don't Build Things LIke They Used To

It's about time I write something insightful. Before things turn sour, a quick shout-out to Jonny Cota from SkinGraft Designs. I'm loving the sleek new website. Easy to navigate, and I enjoy the focus on events. I still wish I could afford those clothes, though! (And wish I had the body to wear them... goddamn you, holiday weight gain!) Now, on topic...

I had the fortune of breaking my iPod recently. I also replaced the keyboard of my Dell Latitude two days ago. That's the third or fourth time I've had work done to my primary machine. Poor Phineas has been through an orange juice spill, the abrupt failure of a charger, the eventual fail of a battery, a short circuiting during shutdown, and the slow smoothing of the plastic on his keyboard. All in two and a half years. It's costing me a fortune. What's the point in having a warranty if it barely covers anything? It will cost $100 to repair the iPod which I got less than two months ago. This calls into question, though, not the nature of warranties (which, in my mind, are built to cover everything but what happens) or the nature of my klutziness, but the nature of design. Where are our principles taking us?

I had an interview yesterday at a certain empire-like corporation. That's right, Microsoft. The digs were nice - free food, laid back people, shuttles going everywhere, five-star hotel with incredibly attractive doorman. Seeing real pine trees was a plus for an east-coaster like myself. I think it went pretty well, and I learned as much about them as they did about me - and maybe a little more about this world as a whole.

I should clarify that I didn't interview for a programmer position. I went for "Program Manager" - the shortest way I can explain it is you design a feature within the program you're working on. Scheduling meetings and documentation are secondary. The key is you are a designer. For all twenty-odd classes I've taken at an Ivy League University the key, designer’s, "takeaway" is this: Know your consumer. While I agree, there is something to be said about the way human beings consume.

They consume an awful lot. An epidemic of obesity can't solely be blamed on hormonal imbalances. The number of people who won't turn off their computers overnight borders on - in my mind - ridiculous. A friend once told me she didn't eat meat because it was "inefficient." To make a cow, said cow must consume grain - let's say 500lbs of corn for a 100lb cow. A human can get 1000 calories by eating 1lb of corn or 1lb of cow. Why use an extra 499lbs of corn if a human being can attain the same energy from one? At first, I thought that was ridiculous, but now, I see her point.

What is the shelf-life of a computer? I feel this period is getting shorter and shorter. To my surprise, my old machines still chug along while I my newly-released laptop get fixed so often, it seems like it gets a check-up. My mother watches YouTube videos on a machine from the 90s. It's slow and loud but perfectly functional. Same goes for our color printer.

At Microsoft, they follow deadlines. A product need not be perfect as long as it caters to 80% of the market. Look at the latest Word - bold, italic, underline, all right there. But if you need letting or line height… good luck. In this case, the rule makes sense. Not too many people will care about line height. I mean, there's no Resume Formatters Union. But in the larger scope, should we have so many deadlines to begin with? Should we force ourselves to consume? It is a principle of technology business that once everyone else gets faster, you must get faster, too.

Our younger generation has become spoiled with instant gratification - cell phones, messengers, fast food, credit cards. But do we really need a new video game every month or a new computer every year? If we took the time with our development cycles, we could certainly make things last longer. Better yet, if we slowed down and took a look at the material culture around us, we could sort out what's important - what's 'new' and ‘fast’ versus what's actually 'good.'

Erik, Arik, Rich, Devindra, if you are reading this, it was fun talking with you guys and coming up with ideas. Thanks for the opportunity.

Art post soon. I drew a lot on my trip. :) The Puget Sound is a lovely area, by the by. Sitting next to crying babies on the plane is not-so-lovely.

Site Critique: Skingraft Designs

http://www.skingraftdesigns.com/

A friend recommended Skingraft to me when I was researching Steampunk clothing for Anachrofactory. Skingraft Designs is a Los Angeles clothing company whose work borders on art. Only independent stores carry it, and many pieces are one-of-a-kind. Although one section denotes pieces for sale, the site is for showcasing, not shopping.

I have a love-hate relationship with Flash sites. Skingraft has a nice layout but does not need its current animation. The photographic content is undeniably incredible but hindered by the interface and pixilation. The site runs from one main menu embedded into a timepiece-like treatment where users click orbs to access sections. This is cleverly keeps with the site's decorative, Victorian style, but the circular frame and usurps valuable screen real estate. The site background is an eye-burning white. A dark, neutral color would bring out the subtle artistic details of the menu and pieces. The realistic photo menu is destroyed by its rollovers. While users appreciate selected states, they should not be heinous, computer-drawn circles laid over the photographs. Instead, the designer should manipulate the photograph and actually have the menu orbs change color.

As with many Flash sites, there is no definite home page, and the five sections must be navigated without a sitemap. Fortunately, the section names are self-explanatory. The “Purchase” link instructs users to go offsite to a distributor called Hunters & Gatherers. "Gallery" happens to have confusing subsection labels. Not all the "Gallery" links actually go to gallery pieces. Those that do provide limited image-viewing functionality. Few viewers will realize the circle between the pagination arrows allows them to view the image source. One cannot zoom in to analyze the lovely pinstripes on the vests or the ruffles on the hoop skirts.


Since the site is very image-oriented, most text is used for headers. However, the header font choice is atrocious, often unreadable. The copy font is simple, but also not well weighted. The logo looks less like a logo and more like a free font with a Photoshop filter. Victorian font should be elegant and historically inspired but not reminiscent of high school Goth. Differentiating link and text can be difficult, especially with Flash. Most things I clicked led me nowhere, and there were no search functions. Clicking “Updates” provides the user with inactive text URLs. Worse, with Flash, one cannot copy and paste. Few people will take the effort to type in a web address.


When taken at high resolution, photographs are great resources for web page layouts. However, that means the site has to match them and must do so with subtlety. If the site treatments were darker, textured, yet soft and text not overly decorated, the gorgeous photography of the designers’ wares would provide just enough balance with the site’s detailed menus. This could easily be done without losing the feel from Steampunk’s grey, brown, and brass theme. Ultimately, Skingraft’s poor use of Flash limits features which are found naturally on HTML pages, and this in turn limits their ability to function as an online gallery.