Thinkcage

One thing that is certain about the SXSW experience is the overwhelming presence of technology. One in five people is toting a laptop computer (90% of those using Apple portables) and nearly everyone has a mobile phone, iPod, PDA or some combination of all of the above. Seeing a person’s technology says a lot about them and I have to admit I had the occasion to peek over an occasional shoulder to spy an open window here and there.

On one hand I was very surprised at the wide range of people at the conference, as classified by what they were doing on their computer. There were plenty of the typical suspects taking notes, blogging the current session, or having IM conversations with friends. I also spotted developer types inexplicably configuring SQL servers and performing database maintenance remotely via a terminal application. There were even a few that were mired in spreadsheet applications working on a business…

…But others were doing what I could only describe as noodling. That is not really accomplishing anything but flipping between applications, swapping tabs, clicking all over the place looking for something new—ANYTHING STIMULATING—amongst the various blogs, IM clients, twitter, etc. Now I didn’t bring a computer to the panels at SXSW, instead armed with my trusty sketchbook I took notes and was generally as attentive and participatory as I could be. But I do know what these people were doing and I’ve since caught myself doing it to. It seems anytime I need an involuntary mental break I immediately begin hovering around my computer, checking email, flipping tabs on my browser, and seeing who’s on IM. It’s like a thirsty man crawling for an oasis as I try to find anything to satisfy whatever it is my mind is craving.

So it is with some understanding that I have to encourage people who attend conferences like SXSW to shut off the computer, sit back, and immerse yourself in the amazing creativity and community that is bursting around you. I think you’re missing out if you don’t.

I’ve got a pretty Utopian view when it comes to the workplace so I’m always interested in what companies are doing to make the office environment more productive, conducive to creativity, more fun, and overall help preserve the separation between what we do to make a living and what we do with our families.

Netflix, the online DVD rental service has a policy of allowing employees to take as much vacation as they’d like. I’m fascinated by the idea that the conventions of the modern workplace need to be rethought and in fact, represent an antiquated system that makes workers less productive. Netflix seems to agree:

“The worst thing is for a manager to come in and tell me: `Let’s give Susie a huge raise because she’s always in the office.’ What do I care? I want managers to come to me and say: `Let’s give a really big raise to Sally because she’s getting a lot done’ – not because she’s chained to her desk.”

I could not agree more.

As a designer, stock photography is a big part of my workflow. Very few of our clients either have or can afford custom photography so we rely heavily on online stock photography resources such as GettyImages and iStockPhoto.com. Getty has everything, but iStock is built around a community and is much more reasonably priced offering images for as little as around a dollar.

Recently, however, I was turned-on to a new resource: Lucky Oliver. Lucky Oliver seems to be built on the model of iStock and that’s a good thing. Plus they’ve added a few twists, a nice snappy site design, and a cute metaphor that makes browsing and buying images a pretty nice experience. The carnival theme is cute and a nice change from iStock’s rapidly aging look. And tokens are only $1 (slightly less than iStock) so you can get images for $1-$20 depending on the size and resolution. Most can be had for under $5.

One feature I really like is the list of related keywords that appears to the right of your image search results. Each one has a “+” or “-” icon next to it that allows you to add and remove additional keywords to and from your query. Getty and some of the others allow you to narrow by choosing a new search from matching words but that isn’t as useful or interactive — and you can’t even see them until you reach an image detail page. With Lucky Oliver the list is right on the results page. Nice.

One advantage iStockPhoto has over Lucky Oliver (and all of the other online services I’ve used) is the Ajax thumbnail previews that dynamically display a larger version of the selected photo when you hover your mouse over each result in the list. This is great for getting a little bit better view of the photo before clicking over to the detail page for a full preview. The lack of this feature isn’t really a problem but I very much would like to see them add it at some point.

All said, I’m glad that Lucky Oliver is out there to provide a comparable alternative to iStockPhoto. If you buy stock photos or even sell stock photos, I’d suggest you give them a try. I know they are now a part of my regular photo searches. Choice is a good thing.

Here’s a good resource for those of you interested in changing to CF lighting. One Billion Bulbs is a neat little community with energy savings calculators and other tools for making the switch and spreading the word. Check out the current stats:

I am bit late to this party, but I wanted to climb on board anyway because I feel very strongly about this.

[Note: this is part of a webwide series of blog posts about compact fluorescent lightbulbs. January is the darkest month of the year in the Northern Hemisphere (December might be a bit darker, but with all the candles, trees and dropping balls, we work hard to light it up). To fight off the darkness, bloggers everywhere are invited to create a post with their own riff on why CF bulbs are cheaper, better politically, harder to market or just plain cute. Your choice. If you trackback here, I'll post your link in a future post and/or you can add your link to this lens, which donates all royalties to Ecotrust].

From Seth Godin’s Blog

This is something I’ve felt pretty strongly about for some time now. I’ve always been a turn the lights off when you leave a room kind of guy so naturally any energy savings is appealing to me. Why? Is it to save on my utility bills? Sure – who wouldn’t want that? But I really think it is more than that. Every bit of energy you conserve cascades, it adds to the big picture. Sure your bills might be a little less. But on a grander scale every little bit of energy that you save is less energy that has to be produced be it via a coal plant or oil refinery. That helps the environment. So when people are still buying large SUV’s because they can “afford” the price of gas, they’re missing the point. There is more to conservation than just your bottom line.

But the thing is, switching away from incandescent lighting may make a bigger impact than you might expect. How big? Well, according to Energystar.gov:

“If every American home replaced just one light bulb with an ENERGY STAR [compact fluorescent bulb], we would save enough energy to light more than 2.5 million homes for a year and prevent greenhouse gasses equivalent to the emissions of nearly 800,000 cars.”

Frankly, that’s a pretty modest goal. Australia has plans to completely ban incandescent bulbs altogether by 2009. How about that for government really acting on something?

So please comment here. Send your trackbacks. Sign the lens linked above. But most of all, replace those outdated bulbs with newer, more energy-efficient compact fluorescent models.

I was fortunate to spend the last few days in Austin, Texas for the 2007 edition of the South by Southwest (SXSW) Interactive conference. This was my first trip to the big show since 2003 and it was great to return. SXSW is an unbelievable experience as a conference without pretense. Not only is it probably the best value in the field at about $225 for early registration, but it’s the only design related conference I’ve been to where the panelists aren’t held on a pedestal and separate from the plebeian masses. Here you may see Jeffrey Zeldman as a panelist in one session and sit next to him in the one that follows. For the most part everyone is approachable, friendly and most of all, genuinely passionate about their little slice of the web.

SXSW is hard to describe — my head is swimming with cool things, ideas, new techniques, and inspiration. I’ve got a list a mile long of things to try and websites to visit. Every year, SXSW seems to have a flavor. Themes, memes, and fun things that seem to capture everyone’s attention. In 2003 everyone was abuzz with online communities and the power of blogs. This year the theme seemed to be Web 2.0 and especially excellent web application design. Oh and don’t forget Twitter. It seems as if every panelist mentioned his or her Twitter obsession. If you happen to twitter, add me as a friend.

I have more to write, but I need to collect my thoughts first. There is nothing like the creative high that you ride on the tails of a good design conference.