Safety Net

...But most companies do not innovate around safety or push for tougher safety standards; they merely comply with existing requirements. Because extra safety pushes prices up and can't be marketed, there's no point in investing in it until a tragedy requires you to do so...

...If anything, safety is downplayed as pre-flight instructions to airline passengers are now routinely presented in a comedy format. Safety is viewed as a "must have" but not a differentiator....

...The range of safety risks has expanded and consumers everywhere are trying new products and experiences they aren't familiar with. Marketers must do more to educate consumers about safe behaviors and not worry so much about putting them off. Consumers will appreciate their honesty.
The ugly truth is safety, until now, does not sell, says John in his essay. But neither did it an electric car ten years ago, nor a web standardised project.

Safety is implicit into a good design. And must be present, but invisible. At whatever price it costs. That means good design in our days.

Read Companies Need to Start Marketing Security to Customers by John A. Quelch, at

Play it safe.

Welcome Back

macOS 2016

MacOs is back, diminished. Welcome Back macOS

Still in: while not authorized for hardware or software packaging, Apple does encourage developers, user groups and "partners" to use this logo on their Web sites.

How Problems Can Occur

In the early days of computing, people were content to simply run programs on their computers. Usability was closely tied to functionality and understandability.
The infamous MS-DOS error message, “Abort, Retry, Fail?” once represented the quality and limitations of our conversations with computers.

An excerpt. A quote. Defiant, comprehensive, incisive yet relevant and necessary from a written essay by Susan Farrel.

This week at Nielsen via AlertBox.

Do Companies Make Bad Decisions?

Whether a paper gets accepted often depends on who the reviewers are, whether they've had enough coffee in the PC meeting, whether they are confident enough to stand up for the work, and so forth. Above a certain threshold, the objective merit of the work has little to do with the outcome.

Matt Welsh, brilliant as ever.

Read his essay, Death by peer review, or thoughts on how the process of peer review could be improved, here


"Russell asked (in a letter written to Frege in 1902), if the set of all sets that are not part of themselves (ie, that set that includes all those sets that are not included in themselves, such as" books ") is part of itself.
 The paradox is that if not part of itself, belongs to the type of sets that are not part of themselves and therefore part of himself. That is, will be part of itself only if no part of himself. "

This unnecessary verbiage described above exemplifies what the greengrocer lady, when I am located at the grocery store, tells me she knows as 'metadata'. I guess this composed word may sound familiar to you because the term is very fashionable in our days.

Besides I can take with me for the home a pair of lettuces from the grocery store, it let me have a brief and interesting exchange of words with the greengrocer lady. For some of us, this composed term is even up in the air you breathe. Thereof is made in the lettuce.

All the lettuces from the grocer's are not included in itself, but wrapped and delivered inside a plastic bag. Better if its made of recyclable paper. The bag, I mean.

Metadata is not bad in themselve, but rather the opposite. Metadata is needed.

Please two lettuces and a bunch of fresh parsley too. How much is it ? Thank you.

Quick Fix

“People assume today’s consumer has to make a deal with a marketing machine to get stuff for ‘free,’ even if they’re horrified by what happens with their data.”

“We don’t have a technology problem, we have a social problem.”
Quoted excerpt from an essay wriiten by Matthew Ingram featuring Sir Berners-Lee.

Tee-Hee. I could not resist to exchange this pleasantry, yes my fault sir.  I know I owe you a round of drinks, Tim.

Via Fortune.

As It Was In 2009

Paul Ford: Like, “I need to publish pages.” Well you should probably just use WordPress and it will cost you less than a dollar a month if you find a certain plan. The cost to produce and deliver content is basically zero or approaching zero. The tools to upload all kinds of rich media and do all that stuff are widely available. You have to ask yourself, “Why?” If it’s for an intellectual exercise it makes a lot of sense.

Rich Ziade: Yeah.

Paul Ford: Anyone who would come to us today and say “I want to build a new CMS.” They need to really know why they’re doing it.

Rich Ziade: Exactly.

Paul Ford: Why would you? What would be your reason to build your own content management tools top to bottom?

 An excerpt from Track Changes, with Paul Ford, that caught my attention.

 A conversation that puts the hit in the nail, presenting serious arguments and inquiries on the following subject: The real need and the objective reasons required to start from the ground and , with this action, to reinvent the wheel.

 A subject, this yours truly, was advocating for time ago. There is no reasonable fact to re-invent the wheel. But, there is the need to polish it. The answer to this plea, now in the year 2016, is the same as it was in the year 2009. Or it was 2010. Who cares.

 There is, however, a subtle difference whether in the talk, whether in the transcript: In those savage years, during the past decade, one still had the option to deliver a fresh new product by putting her/his hands on work. But nor Mom neither the Milkman invested in fresh new delivered products. It was not did then, neither now. Open the bottle and fill me with its content. Mom and the Milkman can make use of the WordPress to accomplish their purposes and objectives. To publish content. Why they should not? WordPress is easy to learn, and it’s more fun to use.

 This yours truly still does not see, now in June 2016, there is any logical reason to start to build a new CMS from the bottom. Except for testing purposes. Or for vanity. Or both. Who knows.

"If it’s for an intellectual exercise it makes a lot of sense."

Rich, Of A Relationship

And maybe the biggest truism that I’ve discovered about software products is they are the direct result of the people who work on them in the beginning, those very early formative stages.

Paul Ford and Rich Ziade sit down with designer Khoi Vinh, who is currently the director of product design for mobile at Adobe, and former Design Director for The New York Times.

Worth a podcast, worth a read.

Handwrought Design

As to frameworks like Bootstrap, they’re great if prototyping is part of your team’s design process—and in the world of apps, it surely should be. Such frameworks make it very easy to quickly launch a working design and test it on real human beings. But after a few iterations have improved your design, it’s time to dump Boostrap and code from scratch.

That’s because launching sites and applications based on Bootstrap or any other heavy framework is like using Microsoft Word to send a text message
Jeffrey, brilliant as ever. Read his last approach on what really matters, here.

Currently listening: 


You are good, you are confident, you are brave.

The Web Marketing Association's 20th annual international WebAward competition for website development, has extended its entry deadline to June 10th. So you have two additional weeks to submit what might be the best website in 98 different industries. Its easy to enter and feels great when you win!

There is still a chance to prove your braveness: what might be the best website 


See you there. No dogs and kids allowed.
Newer Posts Older Posts Home