Anyway,  here’s the original article (which appeared first over at PCPlus magazine).

Goodbye Facebook

What’s my big news this month? I’ve quit Facebook. There’s been a lot of talk recently about the site’s privacy policy, and the increasing amount of data that the social behemoth is trying to make publicly available.

As always, it’s geeks and tech journalists that get irate about these kind of things, while most users don’t even bat an eyelid. But that doesn’t make the current situation with Facebook OK. It’s anything but OK.

I look at Facebook like a virtual form of smoking. In isolation, each cigarette you smoke doesn’t really do your body much damage. To the contrary, you even see headlines screaming statements such as ‘Smoking found to be good for you!’ But these stories only ever focus on one small side-effect of smoking, such as the way cigarettes suppress appetite or help to prevent the onset of various dementias by bolstering receptors in the brain. The problem is – and it’s a fairly big problem – that despite these little wins, half of the people that smoke will eventually be killed by their habit.

By no means am I trying to say that Facebook will kill you – at least, I don’t think it will – but what I am trying to say is that you won’t notice the negative effects of Facebook’s increasing lack of privacy and endless obfuscation until it’s too late.

Ask yourself these questions about Facebook: Do you know what information is publicly available about you? Do you know how much of your information advertisers and third-party developers can access? Do you know the last time Facebook made arbitrary changes to its privacy policy? I don’t, and neither do most people, and that really bothers me. When I signed up to Facebook, it was under the proviso that it was a closed network, but that’s not the case any more (if it ever was). The bottom line is this: it doesn’t pay for Facebook to keep your information private – it pays for it to make it public.

If Facebook’s default was ‘Everything private, unless you state otherwise’, then I’d be more than happy, but that doesn’t look likely. So, taking all these things into account, I deleted my Facebook account about a month ago, and the very act of doing so reassured me that I was doing the right thing. Facebook makes it very difficult to find information on deleting an account, and many people only ever ‘deactivate’ them (not realising there’s a difference). Also, as you go through the process you get little messages informing you that random people in your Friends list are going to miss you, which is just creepy. Very creepy.

Despite not getting one ‘Miss you’ message after leaving – damn you, real world! – I did start to receive some interesting messages from people I knew. I got messages like ‘Facebook has made my life hell on more than one occasion, just not sure I’m as brave as you are’ and ‘You went ahead and deleted? I salute you, I’m not that brave just yet…’. Brave? I found that a really interesting adjective to use in this situation, because if I had to use one word to describe how I’ve felt since quitting Facebook, it’s ‘liberated’.

However, it’s not all plain sailing, and there is a downside to quitting Facebook; again I’m left making references to smoking. As an ex-smoker, I’m the worst kind of zealot (is there a good kind?). I’m always the first to complain about those smoking near my children and me, and I’m always on hand to offer advice on the best ways to quit. Likewise, I’m now the person eagerly telling anyone who will listen – whether it’s in the office or via a magazine column – that quitting Facebook is something you can do, and that it isn’t followed by the appearance of a giant chasm that sucks you into the bowels of the universe, where your witty updates will never be ‘Liked’ by another living soul. But hey, this kind of zealotry I can live with.

You will get a few people confused by the fact you’ve quit Facebook, and you will miss a few of those people in your Friends list, but I don’t regret my act of deletion one bit. And, if you’re really worried about people losing touch, you can do as a colleague of mine Chris Phin did, and set up a very basic new account that points to a website or Twitter account of your choosing. If people really want to get in touch, they’ll find a way, and you can rest safe in the knowledge that the various information and media you’ve shared over the years won’t be used in a way you never intended.

“For more than a decade I’ve followed an unwritten rule: never get involved in public mudslinging”

I’ve lost track of the number of times people, even contributors, have jumped onto social media platforms and launched a personal attack on us. Sometimes that criticism has had merit, at other times it was way out of order, but either way a simple call or email would have cleared up the matter. Yet they chose a public forum to air their dirty linen. Not cool.
Within the industry, this kind of public bitching about each other is happening more and more. Private discourse is almost always more rewarding and productive, and you don’t come across as an arsehole. Just something to think about.

This is an editorial intro, taken from issue 224 of .net magazine (on sale now)

For those that don’t know, Jon Hicks is a British designer who has been creating some of the web’s most noteworthy icons over the last decade. For this book – which weighs in at 330 pages – Hicks has partnered with independent publisher Five Simple Steps to present what the author refers to as a ‘manual, reference guide, and coffee table book’. (A laudable undertaking, indeed.)

And, before I continue with this review, it’s worth noting that I’ve only had access to a PDF of the book, which was kindly provided by Mark Boulton at Five Simple Steps. I’m sure the print version will meet the high production values of previous Five Simple Steps books, but I’m going to concentrate on the content and design in this review.

Dive in!

When you get hold of a new book, especially one aimed at improving your skill set, it’s incredibly easy to skip past any forewords and introductions. However, in the case of The Icon Handbook, doing this will severely detract from your enjoyment. The foreword, by Edward Boatman from the Noun Project, offers up the perfect introduction to icons. In just a few hundred words, Boatman manages to convey the importance of icons throughout the ages. Next up, Hicks’ introduction provides a small insight into an obsession with icons that started from a very early age. The cultural references are quintessentially British – overseas readers will probably have to Google Michael Fish and the I-SPY spotter’s guides – but it’s great to see that these references weren’t edited out of existence (kudos goes to the book’s editor Chris Mills for that).

Design

It’s pointless beating around the bush here, The Icon Handbook looks gorgeous. Text is presented in a single column, and – thanks to a sympathetic character count per line – is a pleasure to read. The main body of the book is black text on a white background, with section colours used for interviews, case studies, and tutorials (which help break up the main body of the book). As you would expect, no corners have been cut with the supporting imagery, and the care and craft taken in producing this book is apparent on every page. This is a book for designers, by designers.

The Coda interview from The Icon Handbook

History and usage

The first two chapters of the book cover a brief history of icons. In the first chapter – A Potted History of Icons – Hicks explains the differences between pictograms, pictographs and petroglyphs, and reveals how the use of icons goes back 5000 years. This may seem unnecessary exposition  – isn’t this book for those people working in digital, after all? – but these initial chapters aren’t just enlightening, they’re essential, and help instill the importance of conveying concepts via iconography. Add to this a number of case studies and interviews – including a Q&A with UI legend Susan Kare, and an insight into how McDonald’s beat global language barriers – and the stage is set for an enjoyable and educational journey through icons (especially those in the desktop and mobile landscape). And, even if you’re not a designer, discovering that the owl (widely regarded in the West as a symbol of intellect) is seen by many in Asia as a representation of stupidity is bound to come in handy one day. Maybe.

Favicons and metaphors

Chapters four and five cover favicons and icon metaphors, and it’s at this point that we start seeing more practical advice come to the fore. Hicks goes through the best apps for creating favicons, and provides a number of tips and guides for getting the best possible results. As always, purely pracitcal tips – such as avoiding perspective in favicons – is followed by typical insight from Hicks, such as the (obvious when you think about it) point that the BBC’s favicon is completely unworkable (as its logo renders poorly at small sizes, and also doesn’t have an element that can be issolated and enlarged). This mix is maintained throughout the book, and ensures that you never get bogged down in theory.

The next chapter looks at metaphor, and explores how you go about tackling client briefs. Hicks reveals the importance of nailing down what an icon is going to be used for, establishing its context, and also identifying who is going to be using the icons you create. Finding a metaphor can be fairly simple for tried and tested use cases, but what happens when you’re struggling for inspiration? Hicks has it covered, as he reveals his primary resources for establishing metaphor, including Google Images, The Noun Project and other online tools. It’s when there are no standards that things start to get difficult, and Hicks shows how mind maps can help you establish your very own standards from scratch.

The book contains practical advice on using colour and more!

Drawing, formats, and apps

As the book progresses from theory to more hands-on advice – including a number of tutorials – Hicks explores the rules of drawing, and goes into more detail on subjects such as export options, scaling, and the use of perspective in icons. Do you know your dithers? If you don’t, Hicks has that covered. Very little code appears in the book, but as Hicks begins to outline the various formats in which you can present icons, things get a little more technical, with sections covering CSS sprites, Canvas, Data URIs, using icons as fonts, CSS3 masks, and how to code pure CSS3 icons.

The final chapter looks at app icons, and it’s at this point that the difficulty level rockets through the roof. Creating flat favicons and interface icons is one thing, but moving into a 3D rendering app is – for some – a step too far. But it shouldn’t be. Hicks makes the jump seem a fairly painless one, and interviews with Bartelme Design and David Lanham (of Coda fame) provide an insight into what it takes to create the best application icons. At the end of this chapter Hick covers the various travails of exporting and testing, and before you know it you’re floating around the Appendix, scribbling down URLs and Android pixel densities!

Conclusion

I love this book. As I was reading the introduction I admit to being slightly sceptical about its claim to be a ’manual, reference guide, and coffee table book’ all in one. But that’s exactly what it is. Congratulations go to Jon Hicks, Five Simple Steps, the book’s editor Chris Mills, and everyone else that had a hand in its production. If you’re interested in icon design for desktop and mobile then The Icon Handbook is for you!

You can find an extract from the book over at .net magazine’s website, on creating the perfect favicon.

The Digital Edition (PDF, ePub, .mobi) of the book is available now, and/or you can also pre-order the paperback, which will be out in January 2012.

So why not use Flipboard, considering I’m all floaty over its UX and design? Well, quite simply, it’s not bringing me the news that I want. And for a content-based app, that’s a big fucking problem. Flipboard currently partners with leading content providers (like ESPN, Wallpaper, Esquire and Wired) in a number of areas – such as ‘entertainment’, ‘Technology’ and ‘sport’ – whose content you can then add to your personalised Flipbaord magazine. The experience is a joy, as you swipe, flip, and swoosh your way through this gorgeous app. And Flipboard does integrate Twitter and Facebook, but there’s no algorithmic fairy dust being sprinkled here. I get EVERYTHING. And that’s too much. (I know, I’m difficult to please, but I’m a Virgo, and apparently that means something in certain circles.)

However, there is some light. When I recently learned that Flipboard had launched a new iPhone app, I chose to dig around, and found an extremely simple way to get at my Tweeted Times content via Flipboard (OK, so a lot of people are probably doing this already, and if you’re one of them, pat yourself on the back for being a big, fat clever cat).

1. First, you need to go the your Tweeted Times homepage and get the RSS feed for your account (there’s an RSS icon to the top right of the interface). Copy that link.
2. Next up, we set up a Google Reader account. Although Flipboard doesn’t enable you to add individual feeds to your magazine, it does enable you to connect Google Reader. I don’t want lots of feeds in Flipboard, though; I just want one. So, if you’re already have a few feeds in Google Reader, you’ll need to create a brand new account, and add just one feed (the Tweeted Times link we just copied). Note your username and password.
3. Now all you need to is install the Flipboard iPhone app, go to ‘Your Flipboard’, select ‘Edit’, delete all the default accounts, and add the Google Reader account that you just set up. Done!

Now, this is by no means perfect, as some stories will lack the required context as you scroll through them, but it’s the best – and most visual way – that I’ve found for accessing my Tweeted Times stories on the iPhone. It may not be for you, but you should definitely check out both services, and if you find a better way to achieve what I’m trying to do, please let me know!

So, I’ve spent the morning trying to read very clearly into a Plantronics headset, whilst also getting my head around the various voice commands that help you make the most of package like Dragon Dictate. And, despite a few teething problems, including the odd typo and some fiddly annoyances, I think this could definitely help in a number of areas. Firstly, there is the transcription of interviews. Although Dragon Dictate cannot transcribe these directly, what you can do–though it’s a bit of a hack–is have an interview playing in one ear, whilst you dictate its directly into the application of your choosing. (For anyone that has to do this kind of thing on a regular basis, and doesn’t have a touch type speed of hundred and 20 words a minute, you’ll appreciate just how valuable this can be.)

However, what I just outlined is a pretty unique requirement, so how does Dragon Dictate handle more standard requirements? As I’ve already mentioned, you do need to train Dragon Dictate for a few minutes once you’ve created your profile. And, as you might imagine, the more you train Dragon Dictate to recognise your voice pattern, the better the application is going to perform. Having said this, based on just a few minutes of training Dragon Dictate performs amazingly well.  Naturally, not every word is perfectly recognised, and the list and voice commands that you used to control app will take some getting used to. But these are small gripes.

The main challenge with using a piece of software like Dragon Dictate doesn’t really have anything to do with the application itself, but more to do with how you adapt to the changes you must make in the way you input text. Decades spent bashing away on a keyboard  precondition your brain to a certain way of working, and it’s quite a challenge to make the switch. Verbalising your thoughts, rather than simply channelling them through your keyboard, is actually quite a tiring process. For most writers and journalists, an article is edited on the page. Your first sentence is a rough draft;  you make small edits; you reorder paragraphs in a document. However, when dictating you must form your thoughts with more clarity before committing them to speech.

The words above are my 1st (this should be ‘first’) attempt at dictating an article and it was an interesting exercise. On a number of occasions I have had to revert to my keyboard  to correct certain errors, but most of these have been style issues, such as the one I have outlined above in brackets.

I’d love to hear how other people have got on when using DragonDictate and if there are any errors in this article, well, you can just blame the app!

You can find out more about Dragon Dictate at www.nuance.com.

This is not a definitive list, and is based purely on my experience, but it will hopefully provide a few pointers for new and exisiting writers looking to score that next commission. (I’ve made the list a ‘top 10′, because editors love numbers and lists. You’ll hear them criticised by a lot of people trying to make an intellectual point, but those people don’t know shit about publishing. Seriously. They don’t.) So, here goes:

1. Read the publication. Even after 15 years in publishing it amazes me how many writers pitch work without having read the relevant publication. Editors have egos – some of them are pretty huge – and by doing some prior reading, and illustrating that in your pitch (mention a past post, feature, campaign), you’ll make the editor feel all warm and fuzzy inside. However, if you pitch an irrelevant article to that self-same editor then your email will hit the trash quicker than a mouldy banana.
2. Tier your pitching. This requires a little bit of planning, but you should make a wishlist of where you’d like to see your article published. Approach the top title first, and then offer them a realistic number of days to commission the piece (a week should do it). If a publication isn’t interested, move onto number two on your list – and so on. You might be wondering why you should do this, but imagine sending a pitch to numerous titles, and having two editors come back to you within minutes, both wanting to commission you. What do you do? Also, pitch to multiple publications at once and you will – at some point – put the wrong details in an email (I’ve had many pitches from writers who love Web Designer Magazine, and think it pisses all over .net – I edit .net).
3. Don’t CC the competition, and ask multiple editors whether they’d like to commission you for an article. Yes, this happens.
4. Provide a few paragraphs, illustrating why this article should be commissioned (maybe mention previous articles that have touched on this area). The information doesn’t have to be in-depth, and it’s often better for everyone to stick to bullet points if possible. Also, provide links to any reference material.
5. Include links to other written work. These articles don’t have to be published by other publications, and can just as easily be a blog post on your own site. If you have no links, then get writing.
6. Be up front. Some publications aren’t keen on using writers that work for the competition. This isn’t always the case, but – if you think there’s any kind of potential conflict – be up front about it. The last thing you want to do is put yourself – and your editor – in an uncomfortable position further down the line.
7. Be courteous and professional. What do I mean by this? Well, here’s a scenario. You’ve written something for a publication, maybe a few things, but you’ve just read one of their articles that has really pissed you off. Do you: a) Jump on Twitter, and try and get some retweet love by slagging off said publication? b) Send an email, or make a call, and actually speak to the editor who’s responsible? Written down like that it seems straightforward, but you’d be amazed how often people choose option a).
8. Give us a call! We’re more than happy to take calls from people that pitch work to us. We may have missed your original email,  or forgotten to follow up. A quick call to double check that an editor has received your pitch is fine, and if you do get an editor that takes umbrage to you contacting them then this is probably a good indication that you should avoid working with them (if they’re like this now, what will they be like when you have a question about your payment?!).
9. Don’t be afraid to ask for feedback. If an editor turned down an article idea, and you think it’s bang on the money, don’t be afraid to mention it in an email or phone discussion. Maybe the topic has been covered, or maybe it’s not pitched at the right audience. Any feedback you get will help you when it comes to that next pitch.
10. No means no. If, following your call, an editor declines your article idea then there’s no need to follow it up with more emails and phone calls. Editors are pretty in touch with what works for their audience, and if they’re not interested in your article then that’s that. However, if you’ve pitched in a professional way, and followed the tips above, when you do get in touch with that editor again you can rest assured that they will remember you, and take the time to read it and repsond. Most of the time.

As I said, this list is by no means definitive, and I’m sure I’ve missed a lot of tips out, but it does cover off some of the basics. Happy pitching!

The brainchild of iA’s founder Oliver Reichenstein, Writer reflected his obsession with typography and interface design, and brought a refreshing, new approach to the world of text editing. Prior to the initial launch of the app, I was lucky enough to get an early look at the iPad version of Writer. I loved the focus on the user (you know, us guys that have to write for a living); and the calm writing interface, with the option to go into ‘Focus mode’ – and concentrate on just three lines of text – was a revelation. However, it wasn’t all revery and drop-to-your-knees design worship, as I felt that the app had a huge blind spot: the lack of a word count.

Seriously? It’s just a word count

It sounds petty, doesn’t it? These guys had gone through hours of painstaking work to create the perfect marriage between productivity, balance and minimalism, and I was pissing and moaning about a word count. But there it is. And, small omission though it was, it convinced me Writer wasn’t for me. (This was despite a word count being introduced in a later update, as – by this point – I was using Pages for any writing I did on the iPad.)

iA Writer for Mac is now available in the App Store

So, when the news reached me that Writer was coming to the Mac, you’d be forgiven for thinking that it wasn’t greeted with much of a fanfare – but you’d be wrong. I was happy. Scratch that. I was over the fucking moon. Why? Because for me, iA Writer had always been the right app (that niggling word count issue aside, which I now knew had been addressed), but on the wrong device. But Writer on a Mac? Oo lah lah! OO-LAH-LAHHH!

What’s under the hood?

If you use the iPad version of Writer you will already be familiar with the core/only functionality, and you’ll also be glad to see that a move to the desktop hasn’t resulted in feature creep – in fact, there are a few features missing! (Dropbox support has gone, as have the iOS-specific touch functions.)
But the beauty of Writer is its simplicity. Column width, leading, contrast, and all aspects of typography have been skillfully utilised to help you remain focused, and a full screen option (Cmd+return) removes all the remaining screen clutter, such as the top menu bar. To get even more focussed, and hone in on just three lines of copy, you can hit Cmd+D (a double tap of D centering the text on screen), and also jump between sentences by either mouse selecting or using Cmd+arrow key. And that’s about it. It doesn’t sound much, does it? But when you’re actually in the process of writing, it’s all you really need; in fact, it’s pretty much perfect. (And those looking for spellcheck options will find them under ‘Edit>Spelling and Grammar’.)

Writer

Come out of Fullscreen mode, because – let me assure you – that’s where you’ll spend most of your time in Writer, and you can hover over the bottom of the UI to bring an info bar into view, which includes a word count (yay!), character count, and reading time. (It would be nice to be able to access this info in Fullscreen mode, via a mouse hover, but hopefully that will come in a future update.)

Conclusion

Firstly, I need to point out that iA Writer isn’t for everyone. If you work in an organisation where you need to quickly write and collaborate on docs, save in multiple formats (Writer is .txt only), mark changes, include and format tables, and other ‘fun’ stuff, then Writer for the Mac won’t cut it. And, as iA would no doubt be the first to point out, there are already a host of tools out there that offer this functionality. However, if you yearn for an app that enables you to concentrate your attention, and express yourself without having to battle the inherent noise of leading text editors, then look no further.

I can honestly say that Writer for Mac will now be my default text editor of choice, and if creative writing plays any part in your personal or working life, then I urge you to give it a try. I don’t think you’ll regret it.

iA Writer for Mac is now available in the Mac App Store, priced at £10.99.

(Note to Markdown users: iA Writer for Mac does support Markdown. I don’t tend to use Markdown, so can’t really comment on its support. However, you can find out more about this text-to-HTML conversion tool over at Daring Fireball.)

The spark

It was a typical season for United in the league, ultimately failing when it mattered most. Or, at least, it was typical United for those of us that had followed the club over the last decade. But 1992 had a profound effect on United –  and most notably on Alex Ferguson. The devastation everyone felt was deep, and was made even more raw by the fact it was our bitter rivals in Yorkshire that took the accolades. But from that game came an amazing resolve, and United unleashed a torrent of stunning football the following year that saw them finish ten points above our closest rival Aston Villa, and marked the beginning of United’s domination of the English game.

Remember ’92

That loss has always rankled, though. And a few miles down the M62 our local rivals have retained bragging rights for the last two decades as United steadily moved closer to that illusive record. On Saturday that should change. No, it will change, and United will finally be crowned the kings of English football. Every United fan should mark this moment, and many of us will spare a thought for that game in 1992.

‘Code is love’ mugs: coming soon! (Taken with instagram)