|
 |
Sunday, July 16, 2006 |
Menu suggestion for McDonald's: buffalo chicken wings. I *love* wings, but they don't lend themselves to being made at home, and they are over-priced in restaurants. McDonald's could charge $3.95/dozen, they would be the most expensive item on the menu, and they would still be $2-4 cheaper than anywhere else.
2:00:10 PM 
|
|
One of the few quibbles I have had-for years-with my favored photo-cataloging software, iMatch, is how long it takes to rotate a photo. All the other programs I have dabbled with have been comparably slow. It appears that MS Picture Manager has solved the problem. Rotations are fast, but are not saved until you tell the program to. I guess they are rotating the number of pixels corresponding to the screen resolution...anyway, it makes a world of difference. The responsiveness is like comparing typical (pre-Ajax) web-based email to fat-client emai.
2:00:09 PM
|
|
A great think about being a biker is that you don't need a second driver to accompany you when dropping your vehicle off at the shop for work. Even if you are driving a few extra miles to get a reputable mechanic.
2:00:08 PM
|
|
Feature Idea for computer software: Print Lock. There are a few documents I have that I never want to print. The most common reason is that the doc contains confidential information, and I don't want it going to a shared printer. The other reason is that the doc is WAY too long, and what I really mean to do is print a Selection (using the MS-Office Print Dialog term) from it.
This need suggests a feature idea to me, albeit one of tertiary importance, but then, all the MS-Office enhancements since Office 97 have been in that category. Here's how it could work.
To implement the Print Lock:
1. Select the Print Lock checkbox.
2. Optionally enter text that will be displayed when a user tries to print the document.
Behavior when a user tries to print the document:
1. System displays a dialog that says "Print Lock has been set on this document. [Optional text added, if any]."
2. Dialog includes buttons: OK, Print Anyway.
3. OK cancels the attempt to print.
4. Print Anyway proceeds to print.
2:00:05 PM
|
|
|
Monday, June 19, 2006 |
It is way too easy to unintentionally end a telephone call. Push the wrong button, and zap--your circuit is ended. Compare this to the typical computer application which at least checks with you before it carries out your "command" to leave unexpectedly.
Back in the old days, before pushbuttons, it was somewhat harder to do this--you would have to depress the switchhook for a couple of seconds. Still, it could be done--toddlers, animals, or stray objects falling across the phone the wrong way.
This has happened to me a few times recently when I was switching from speakerphone to regular mode on a cordless phone. Some phones I have had use the SPKR button as a toggle--so pressing it while you are on speakerphone mode changes it back to handset-mode. Others, however, use the TALK button to switch back, and assume pressing the SPKR button is how you want to hang up!
6:46:20 PM
|
|
|
Friday, June 09, 2006 |
Huh, how about that?! I just did a search in Google:
" thermostats elevator 'door open' button 'not hooked up' "
I really expected it to be too many search terms to yield any results, but I got 3 items, one of which had a very long discussion of these and other "mechanical placebos". The responses here do make the good point that the Door Open buttons always serve a definite function in Firefighter's Operation mode.
7:20:47 PM
|
|
The technique described below would not be necessary, of course, if the Door Close button on elevators actually did anything. I worked for Otis Elevator for years, and learned a little secret of the elevator industry: the Door Close buttons are rarely hooked up. The feeling is that you get better performance if the car dwells for a while at the floor.
I haven't studied this, but it sure doesn't feel true to me. At the Lobby, yes, definitely. But for non-lobby traffic, usually there is a clutch of people waiting for the elevator, they get on when it arrives, and nobody else gets on before the doors close.
I read once that the majority of thermostats in office buildings were not hooked up. It was a deliberate ruse to pacify people--apparently complaints about the temperature dropped greatly if people believed they could alter the temperature, even if there attempted alteration produced no result. If I didn't know about the elevator Door Open buttons, I would be sure that was an urban legend (I'm not sure it isn't, but I'm willing to believe it may be true.)
7:20:46 PM
|
|
It can be annoying, when you have entered an elevator that is parked at a floor (typically the lobby), and, just as the "dwell-time" delay is ending, and the doors begin to close, someone rushes toward the elevator--not fast enough to get through the doors on their own, but close enough that someone on-board feels obliged to press the Door Open button, causing the doors to re-cycle again, and delaying your trip up. It gets more annoying when it happens repeatedly on the same elevator trip. I'm pretty sure it is also generally less efficient--from a big-picture traffic-handling (i.e., throughput) perspective. Yet it seems un-mannerly to refrain from attempting to hold the train for one's fellow.
I have a solution.
After registering your floor call in the elevator, move as far away as possible from the button panel. That way, when you see someone rushing toward the elevator, instead of reaching over and hitting the Door Open button, you can just stand there and look sympathetic as you watch, helplessly, while the doors slide together, and your brief elevator journey begins, without undue delay. Or for extra-credit, make a show of reaching, ineffectually, toward the panel, as the doors close and you take off.
7:20:45 PM
|
|
A colleague told me she had been told by an acquaintance in the industry that airfares are sometimes lower at night than during weekdays. The underlying logic being that deep-pocketed businesses do their booking on weekdays, whereas price-sensitive consumers are more likely to search at night or on the weekend.
The story has some hallmarks of an urban legend--superficial plausibility. The airline industry does do some funky things with fares--just the kind of baffling situation that might incubate an urban legend. It just seems too easy to see through for industry--start having corporate travel agents work night shifts.
7:20:41 PM
|
|
|
Wednesday, May 31, 2006 |
I came across these instructions for adjusting your automobile side mirrors to eliminate the notorius "blind spots" on each side. I've been trying it for a couple of weeks, and it seems to work quite well. So well that it makes me wonder why the practice hasn't spread.
I can remember clearly, back 25 years ago in driver's ed class, the instructor explaining how to set the side mirror (singular--this was before right-hand mirrors had become common), so that it showed a little bit of the side of your car. He even quizzed us as to why we should set it this way. The answer, of course, was to provide a reference point, or context, for what you were seeing. Now I see how misguided that practice is.
The best defense I can think of, other than tradition, is that by giving you a reference point, you can ascertain with an immediate, un-thinking glance even as you are pulling away, that your mirrors are adjusted as you expect. Whereas with the blind spot elimination technique, you can not verify so quickly and casually that the mirrors are set right; there is a brief calibration process that is needed, and it is definitely best undertaken while not in motion.
So, I find myself wondering whether this practice falls into the "safety feature that you are not sure whether you want to become dependent on" pattern. That is, if you get accustomed to this practice, will you be disciplined enough at all times--when driving someone else's car; when driving your spouse's car and you don't anticipate getting on a multi-lane road (which is typically when the blind spot becomes a consideration), but plans change, and you do--to take the time to perform the calibration?
(Some other cases of this pattern are: auto-shutoff irons, anti-lock brakes.)
10:46:56 PM
|
|
A lab
study on multi-tasking. I am generally skeptical about
multi-tasking claims. On the negative side, I think multi-tasking
often means doing two things poorly or slowly.
On the positive side, sometimes it means filling in wasted wait-states
with other activity. This is why teenagers can "multi-task" by
carrying on 4 IM conversations at once--IM intrinsically has lots of
gaps, where you are sitting, waiting for people to type and transmit
(one reason I don't care for IM). Technically, this isn't really
multi-tasking, it could more accurately be called
"task-filling", but that is a somewhat fine distinction. My
favorite use of task-filling is reading while waiting in line at a
store (PDAs are ideal for this).
One of the purest forms of multi-tasking I can think of is talking on
the cell phone while driving. Setting aside safety concerns, you drive
pretty much the same as when not gabbing, maybe a bit slower, but not
much; and you pretty much achieve a full conversation. The
counter-argument against this might be that you drive considerably
less safely, so you are paying a high price in risk, it's just that
most of the time, obviously, that risk is not realized, so it
seems like you are getting a multi-tasking two-fer, until you
pay the price with an accident.
My personal favorite form of multi-tasking is reading while
exercising. I can ride the exercise bike, or do the elliptical
machine, and read (most stuff) with about 90% the efficiency of
reading while sitting.
10:46:53 PM
|
|
|
Monday, May 01, 2006 |
I'm not holding my breath, but I hope this campaign tactic catches on:
And so, in a reversal of tactics, challengers here and in other states like Montana, Ohio and Rhode Island are telling voters what the incumbents have brought home, in the hopes, it seems, that the national controversy over the pet projects known as earmarks has come home, too.
10:13:35 PM
|
|
|
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 |
Air Canada is offering flight passes, a subscription model somewhat like the one I suggested a year ago. Prices are pretty crummy, at least from the perspective of a leisure traveler--$540 to fly within the eastern half of Canada, for example. I'm not clear if they can be used to buy tickets for others, or are good only for the named traveler who bought them. It looks like they are focused on the business traveler, as opposed to my idea for obtaining more marginal-traveler leisure business, while not cannibalizing your high-margin business-travel business.
10:49:11 PM
|
|
|
Sunday, April 09, 2006 |
As I've observed before, it hard to find a good, simple cell phone. Apparently at least one manufacturer is starting to think this way; from a NYT article on batteries for electronics:
The Nokia 1100 cellphone may not offer Bluetooth networking, a camera or even a color display, but it can go up to 16 days without being recharged. Colin Bullock, a senior engineer at Nokia in Dallas, says that stripping away the extras and using a black-and-white display sharply reduced the slow drain on the battery, something the engineers call the "quiescent current."
12:56:39 PM
|
|
|
Wednesday, April 05, 2006 |
Dell's AC power adapters come with a cleat and captive strap, in order to neatly secure the cord, when wrapped up. A very nice example of value-added packaging.
8:59:13 PM
|
|
|
Thursday, March 30, 2006 |
I've read a few lengthy articles in the past couple of years, "pushing back" against the rising concern regarding the obesity epidemic; I blogged about one of them. These articles tend to claim that: 1) Fitness, not fatness, is the important thing; 2) That the hue and cry over fatness is, in large part, moralistic and aesthetically-driven, rather than health-driven.
Now it appears there is a large study that indicates that obesity is, in fact, a risk for heart disease independent of fitness, and the more significant of the two. In other words, obese and fit is not nearly as good as trim and fit (in fact, it appears that obese and fit is worse than trim and un-fit). I strongly suspected as much--though it is a perilous business to hang one's hat on the latest study, because surely there will be another that comes along to cast doubt on the predecessors!
The other thing I can't get over, in all these articles, is that they treat the "fat and fit" case as if it were a significant occurrence (which it certainly isn't, in my experience), rather than an interesting, but mostly hypothetical, alternative hypothesis.
8:25:14 PM
|
|
Since I occasionally get emails regarding my post on the disappearance of www.FilmValues.com, I thought I would provide such update as I can. I still have no idea what happened to the site. I have searched, briefly (including newsgroups) without success. The best replacement I have found so far is KidsInMind.com.
1:59:54 PM
|
|
Also, (in regard to the idea of a selective reading from a novel) what about book previews? Why not have book previews, just like we have movie previews? I personally love movie previews, and they often entice (and more often, dissuade) me to watch a film. Why not thave the same thing for books?
1:49:16 PM
|
|
Have you ever read a book (I'm thinking primarily of fiction), and really wished you could get someone you know to read it, because it conveys some truth you have previously grasped, but never articulated? It happens to me moderately frequently. But getting someone else to read a book just because you think it is interesting or relevant can be a tall order. I know my own reading list is quite backlogged, and I wouldn't be terribly receptive to most requests of this sort.
That got me to thinking--what I'm really looking for is a selective samplilng of the book, calculated to convey much of the essential flavor of the book, in 20 pages? Not an abridged version, nor a Cliff Notes-style synopsis. It should use only the verbatim language of the book. That way, when I am trying to explain to someone the mental state of the protagonist of Lucky Jim, for instance, and the language used by the author to describe it--eloquent phrasing describing a trivial existence; an internal voice with mastersful phrasing inhabiting a weak and defeated character; self-conscious without being self-psycologizing--they could read 20 pages, and have a clue as to what I'm talking about.
I know this will probably make me sound like an awful philistene to some, but it seems, to me, of at least hypothetical usefulness!
1:49:14 PM
|
|
|
Monday, March 13, 2006 |
More advanced thinkers than I on the theory that very good architecture and design could slash the amount of living space we feel need to be comfortable.
12:43:55 PM
|
|
On our prior cordless phone, you toggled off of speakerphone mode by pressing the Talk key. That phone had a separate off key, I think.
Our cordless phone has a nice useability glitch. There is a big key on the left that says "TALK (end)"--in other words, and on/off toggle. Next to it is a key that says SPKR--to switch to speakerphone mode. So the question is--what do you do to turn off speakerphone mode? My intuition says: toggle the SPKR button. WRONG! That ends the conversation.
Like many useability glitches, the way you stumble into it involves a Murphy's law corrolary: the worse possible time. Just imagine--you make the dreaded call to customer service, and since "wait times are averaging 13 minutes", you turn on the speakerphone and lay the phone next to the keyboard. 13 minutes later, when the CSR starts to answer, you pick up the phone. Intending to put it in handset-mode, you press the SPKR key again, AND HANG UP!
As a tangent, this makes me realize that the IRV platform in general lacks any feature along the lines of "Warning--you are about to terminate your connection! Is this what you want to do?"
8:48:33 AM
|
|
|
Saturday, March 11, 2006 |
We do a lot of shopping at Sam's Club, so when they offered a Discover card with 2% cash back, we applied for it. 2% is quite good, I have a Visa that gives 1%. I think I have found their trick--it looks like they are going to send your "rewards" check monthly.
I just received a check for $1.41. Hardly even worth cashing. Which, I think, is exactly the point--a significant percentage of the checks will probably just be tossed in the trash. Like picking up a penny, they will not be worth the calories it takes to monetize them!
It quite a diabolical strategy, the opposite tack of most cash-back cards. The typical cash back card--if my experience is an indicator--doesn't do much of anything to remind you that you even have a balance to cash in. I had to call, well after a year, to ask to get my rewards check. Prompt, monthly, automatic payment--on the surface, it would appear to be beyond reproach!
12:58:03 PM
|
|
|
Monday, March 06, 2006 |
Software firewalls will monitor applications/processes trying to
access in the internet, and will prompt the user, case by case, to
approve or deny access. Setting aside the fact that many home users
have no clue about what to approve or not, I have been wondering what
is to keep the authors of malicious spyware to give those processes
innocuous and valid-sounding names. Like if I got prompted to let
Win32DLL.EXE access the internet, would I think twice about it?
5:25:05 PM
|
|
I've been using first NetFlix, then Blockbuster, for almost 3 years, to have DVDs delivered straight to my mailbox. For a fixed price, I get to have 3 movies out at a time. I typically try to balance this: 1 kids movie, 1 family movie, 1 grown-up movie. So as any remotely geeky reader will undoubtedly have already inferred, I am thinking that the "queue" functionality they provide could be improved to support this kind of requirement.
As things stand now, you get only 1 queue. You can re-arrange the priority of items within it, which directly translates to the order you receive them. So, if you are returning your family movie, but the next item in the queue is a grown-up movie, you can set a new order that makes a family movie the new #1, so that that will be the replacement you receive, thus keeping your "inventory" balanced.
I know they want/need to keep things simple, but wouldn't it be nice if they offered an advanced option for multiple queues, a number corresponding to the number of movies your plan lets you have out at one time (3 in my case)? That would automatically keep your inventory in balance.
UPDATE: My friend Gim says that NetFlix does have this feature.
10:24:05 AM
|
|
|
Sunday, March 05, 2006 |
|
Saturday, March 04, 2006 |
This year, my employer offered, for the first time, a combination high-deductible/HSA insurance option. To induce people to try it, they offered a one-time sweetener. I crunched the numbers, and determined that I couldn't lose: if I under-spent the limit, I was money ahead; if I came out on the nose, it was break-even; and if I exceeded the limit, I was ahead (because I wouldn't have co-pays). So we signed up.
The part I was concerned about was the paperwork. They offer this "crossover account" thingy, whereby you automatically get your reimbursement check as soon as the EOB hits. That's good. But then you have to pay the provider, when they send you their bill. That's seems okay, because you have already received the reimbursement.
Here's my fear: double-billing. If the provider double-bills Blue Cross, Blue Cross will notice, and reject the second bill. But will I notice? I have put together a workflow to help ensure I do, but what a pain.
And sure enough, I have my first case of double-billing. I paid, by mail, on 2/18. Two weeks later, I received another bill, dated 2/28. So unless the U.S. mail was doing very poorly, the excuse was not that they crossed in the mail. It was presumably that the latency of their payment processing resulted in a second bill being sent out.
So the next question is, what if I had not noticed, and paid a second time? Probably they would have noticed, and cut me a check for credit. But you never know...
10:56:39 PM
|
|
© Copyright 2006 Erik Neu.
|
|
|
