This stuff's the Flow

Why I hate Adobe

Here, in a nutshell, is why I hate Adobe:

Photoshop: Window→Workspace→Keyboard Shortcuts & Menus…

Illustrator: Edit→Keyboard Shortcuts…

Do the Photoshop and Illustrator teams not have one another’s phone numbers or email addresses? Do they work on opposite sides of the country? Why the hell would you have an inconsistency like this? Small things like this needlessly increases the learning curve for two similar and interdependent programs (published by the same company!). This is just one minor inconsistency, too. Illustrator and Photoshop have some features that seem at first glance to be identical, but with just enough inconsistency (particularly in keyboard shortcuts) to make switching from one program to the other ridiculously frustrating for a new user.

And by the way, the reason I dug these menu items out was because Photoshop and Illustrator both by default use command-H for something other than hiding the program. Classy, Adobe. Real classy.

Of course there’d be a giant outcry if Adobe did go through Photoshop and Illustrator to tighten them up and make transitioning between the two easier since the professional design community has long since learned to use the two programs despite their different quirks. I just have to wonder why Adobe didn’t keep these programs in sync all along; they’ve controlled both programs from their earliest roots, so it’s not like they didn’t have a chance to keep them congruent.

Rainbow Six Vegas 2 and Xbox parties

I’m not usually a big fan of the realistic anti-terrorist shooters, but Rainbow Six Vegas 2 for the Xbox 360 (and other systems) is growing on me. My cousin has always been really into the Rainbow Six series, and he convinced me to buy Vegas 2 this week and attend an Xbox party with him and a bunch of his Xbox Live friends on Saturday.

It was a blast. Xbox Live already has voice communication going for it, but it’s so much more fun to actually be in the same room with the people you’re playing with. There were a bunch of people at the party (about 14-15 playing Vegas 2 at any given time, and a few others doing their own thing for whatever reason). Definitely more fun than hooking up to matches with total strangers who all too often turn out to be idiots (or twelve years old).

As for the game, Vegas 2 seems like a pretty standard entry into the tactical shooter genre. It only takes a few shots to kill you, taking cover behind walls, boxes, and so forth and peering out as you wait for an enemy is a standard tactic, and half the time when you get killed you have no idea where it came from (thanks to said hiding and peeking around corners). Normally I find these kind of games really frustrating; I was introduced to shooters (specifically online multiplayer shooters) playing Aliens vs. Predator which was filled with claustrophobic maps where your best survival tactic was to simply never stand still, so retraining myself to approach the map one room at a time is difficult.

The controls for Vegas 2 also threw me off. They’re quite different from most shooters I’ve played, and vastly different from Call of Duty 4 (which I’ve been playing recently).

Where Vegas 2 stands out is the variety of multiplayer options available. The entire campaign can be played through cooperatively, either via Live or split screen, and the various multiplayer gametypes are quite fun. Particularly appealing is the fact that if you can’t find enough people to pull off a good team deathmatch, you can do a “terrorist hunt” which allows you and up to three friends to fight bots on the multiplayer maps. I really enjoy coop games and the occasional bot fight, so the variety of options available in Vegas 2 is great.

I’d definitely recommend Vegas 2 if you’re looking for a good tactical shooter with great multiplayer options. It might not be anything special in the sub-genre of realistic anti-terrorist shooters (I wouldn’t know), but it’s the first one that I’ve been able to get into, and is a lot of fun to play with friends.

I’m a multi-Mac man

I can’t believe that I haven’t blogged this yet! Last weekend I noticed Apple was selling refurbished iMacs for a steeper discount than normal, and after a little soul-searching I bought myself a refurbished 24″ glossy widescreen iMac. I hadn’t intended to buy it for a couple months, but I couldn’t pass up $400 off.

My current setupIt arrived on Wednesday, and after spending most of the day migrating stuff over from my MacBook Pro I was able to start using the iMac for work on Thursday. It is now my work machine, and I’m a multiple-Mac owner.

I am ecstatic about the iMac. The screen is huge (which was why I wanted one; I’ve been getting frustrated with my ability to do detailed graphics work on the MacBook Pro), and absolutely gorgeous. It’s perfect for the image work that I need to do, too; when I started using it Thursday, I instantly noticed some fairly severe JPEG artifacts that I’d missed on the laptop. I am continually impressed with Apple’s design ethic, and the iMac is a great example of why Macs are a better choice than just about any other computer out there.

The move from a single computer to computers that are designated “work” and “personal” has been an interesting one. I decided before the computer arrived not to use Apple’s migration assistant to move my data. The iMac has plenty of room, of course, so synching my home account wouldn’t be a problem space-wise, but frankly my Home folder is a disaster. I try to remember to use AppZapper, but there are possibly hundreds of unused preference files from apps I installed once and never touched again, not to mention the hell of my desktop and downloads folders. My documents folder is slightly better off, but still suffers from a number of folders that third-party software dropped inside without consulting me.

In any case, migrating to a new computer seemed like an ideal time to clean things up, so I did everything by hand. Took a while, but the spotless iMac desktop tells me it was worth it. I also discovered some tools to ease multiple computer problems, but I’ll share those another time.

Why you should never consider buying StuffIt

I’ve seen a few reviews of StuffIt Deluxe online, but they never seem to mention the truth about StuffIt, which is that you should never, ever consider buying it. Here’s why it will be a major waste of money:

  • StuffIt Deluxe 7 included minor bug fixes up to version 7.0.3.
  • StuffIt Deluxe 8 ($30 upgrade) included minor bug fixes up to version 8.0.2.
  • StuffIt Deluxe 9 ($30 upgrade) included minor bug fixes up to version 9.0.2.
  • Stuffit Deluxe 10 ($30 upgrade) included minor bug fixes up to version 10.0.2.
  • StuffIt Deluxe 11 ($30 upgrade) included minor bug fixes up to version 11.0.2.
  • StuffIt Deluxe 12 ($30 upgrade) is currently at version 12.0.1.

My personal story is that I bought it back at version 8. They released version 9 about a month afterward (and I had to pay the upgrade fee). I didn’t mind upgrading, though, because the .sitx format’s JPEG compression looked awesome.

Of course, it didn’t actually compress JPEGs like they claimed, so StuffIt was virtually useless. I figured that they’d release an update to fix the problem, though, and they did.

It was called StuffIt Deluxe 10. And it was still buggy and not fulfilling their promises.

According to my records, I also bought the update to version 11. I’m not really sure why. I must have been taking stupid pills. Apparently, I’ve given whoever the hell owned or owns StuffIt (it seems to change every other year) almost $180 for software that doesn’t work the way it’s supposed to.

Now we’re up to version 12 (which I have not purchased an upgrade for; gee, go figure), and I will bet you money (how’s $30 sound?) that we’ll see version 13 before we see 12.0.4.

StuffIt Deluxe will not help you. Smith Micro will take your money and laugh all the way to the bank, then turn around and sincerely ask for an upgrade fee.

Admittedly, .sitx files are pretty cool and a helluva lot more effective than zips (as long as the rest of the world doesn’t need to see your compressed files). Of course, you could always just buy PathFinder 4 ($35, or $18 upgrade from version 3; currently at version 4.8.3), which includes .sitx compression and decompression.

Why this completely out-of-the-blue rant? I had to compress an image file way, way down and found myself at the StuffIt website wondering if I should upgrade. Fortunately I neglected my stupid pills this morning, and I remembered that PathFinder had added .sitx compression. After that close call I decided to remind myself (and others) once and for all why you should never even remotely consider buying StuffIt Deluxe. I’m actually a little perplexed how the software has persisted this way for so long without someone with actual clout calling it to the carpet.

Microsoft Office 2008 impressions

After a seemingly interminable wait, my copy of Microsoft Office 2008 arrived without warning a few days ago. I was mildly excited (after all, I’d heard really good things about the interface improvements, and I love playing with new software).

Then I installed it. While I have to admit that the interface is somewhat improved (at least in Word; I haven’t used the others as much), there’s one little problem that the reviews I read failed to mention:

At its core, Office 2008 isn’t more Mac-like. It’s more Vista-like. This is perhaps a subtle difference, thanks to the fact that many of Vista’s improvements are inspired by Mac OS X.

I have, admittedly, only used Vista briefly, but from those brief encounters, it seemed to me that Vista introduced a number of nifty visual effects that increased the system requirements without serving any functional purpose.

This is one of the big differences between Apple and Microsoft’s approach to interface design. Apple’s Aqua interface has a number of cool visual effects (Exposé being one of the most obvious). In general, Apple designed said effects to reinforce the way the operating system works. Exposé’s swooping windows immediately communicate what is happening to the user without any need for textual explanation. Even Time Machine’s over-the-top space animations effectively tell the user what the program is doing.

(The only obviously superfluous effect I can think of off the top of my head is the ripple effect in Dashboard when you add a new widget. Whenever I need to remind myself that Apple isn’t perfect, I add a few new widgets to Dashboard. Ludicrous.)

Designing Vista, Microsoft seems to have asked themselves why OS X is doing so well and then decided that it was because of the interface’s bubbly appeal to the user. They then proceeded to implement a number of visual effects in Vista, including highly transparent windows, glowing buttons, and “Flip 3D” tab switching.

These visual effects do make Vista more appealing (translucent windows in particular are pretty cool). However, they also incur a hefty hit to the system requirements, and most of them, to be perfectly frank, are superfluous. In point of fact, if you don’t have a good enough graphics card or just don’t like the eye candy, you can turn Vista’s visual effects off.

The fancy transparent windows and so forth of Vista are unnecessary, and Microsoft designed them knowing they served no functional purpose (otherwise they wouldn’t be optional). They’re like cheap frosting on a homemade cake. All they add is a few pounds to your waistline, and cake would have been just as tasty without them.

When Apple designs a visual effect, they don’t let you turn it off. Expos´’s eye candy isn’t optional because it is an integral part of Expos&eacute’s function. Apple undoubtedly went through a number of different implementations for Expos&eactue and chose the one we know and love because it was a great marriage of form and function.

Both Apple and Microsoft invest time and effort into carefully designing appealing visual effects, but Apple takes care to remember that unless the visual effect has a purpose, you’re probably better off freeing up some of the computer’s memory.

Which leads me to Microsoft Office 2008. One of the first things I noticed when I launched Word 2008 (aside from the fact that it took almost as long to launch as Word 2004 did; ouch) was a superfluous visual effect. Specifically, the rippling button mouseovers down in the lower left corner. See for yourself:

[ Javascript required to view QuickTime movie, please turn it on and refresh this page ]

This is Vista-style design at its best:

  • If you took the ripple effect away, the user would be unaffected
  • The ripple effect doesn’t reflect what is going on (a ripple on a pond happens when something comes into contact with the pond, not when something hovers near the pond)
  • The ripple effect (and others like it) are contributing to Word gulping down memory and performing like a sluggish juggernaut despite being a Universal application

Granted, this is a single, small detail, but it’s representative of the overall approach to Office 2008’s design. Microsoft’s Mac Business Unit has tried to make Office a better Mac citizen by imitating Apple design patterns without taking the time to understand either Apple’s method or design logic.

Rippling buttons may be a harmless example of the results of imitating Apple interface design without understanding the underlying logic (disregarding for the moment the performance hit caused by lots of little interface embellishments adding up), but the Word preferences window shows how design without logic can make using the software difficult. Word 2008’s preferences have been considerably changed from 2004 and now resemble a standard Mac program preferences screen:

Word 2008's new preferences window

On the surface, definitely an improvement. The problem is in the details: two of those preference buttons are document-specific preferences. They aren’t even separated out, but are rather intermingled in with the program-wide preferences (the two in question are Security and Compatibility). The preferences window may look similar to other Mac preference windows, but the underlying design logic that governs Apple products simply isn’t there, making the entire thing confusing and difficult to use.

Although I haven’t yet explored PowerPoint, Excel, and Entourage in detail, my initial cursory use of them hasn’t done anything to change my opinions about the general design ethic throughout Office 2008. To be honest, I’m really disappointed. I was hoping that when reviews said Office 2008 was more Mac-like it meant that Microsoft applied some Apple design logic to improve the user experience instead of making changes based on Apple’s superficial interface.

On a more positive note, Office 2008 is an improvement over Office 2004. Once things are running, the programs are a little bit more responsive, and some of the notable downsides to the program don’t affect me (I never used the VBA scripting language, for instance). Given that I paid practically nothing for the upgrade thanks to the “super suite” deal, I can enjoy the positives without worrying about the negatives. I don’t regret upgrading to Office 2008, but I’m disappointed at the many missed opportunities in the program.

Overall my relationship with Office is unchanged. I only ever used Office 2004 when I had to (mainly so I could be guaranteed of compatibility with clients), and there is nothing in Office 2008 that would encourage me to use the software voluntarily instead of turning to Nisus Writer Pro or the iWork suite.

I hope that one day Microsoft will realize that what makes Apple products attractive isn’t the lickable interface, but the design ethic that underlies all of their decisions. For now, though, upgrading to Office 2008 is like upgrading from Windows XP to Vista; prettier, but with the same intrinsic flaws.

How to install Chyrp

Chyrp’s installation instructions are worthless, and the installation script’s errors even worse. If you’re trying to install Chyrp and getting “Could not modify database settings file” errors, make sure that you’ve followed all of these steps:

  • If you don’t already have a database ready for Chyrp, set one up and make sure you have the details on hand (host/database/user/password).
  • Unzip the package and upload the files to the desired location on your server.
  • In your FTP program, open up the includes folder and change the files named config.yaml.stock and database.yaml.stock to config.yaml.php and database.yaml.php respectively. Set both files’ access permissions to 777 (read/write/execute for everyone).
  • You may also need to rename chyrp.htaccess to .htaccess and give it 777 permissions, as well. There were conflicting reports online, and I did it just in case.
  • Navigate to Chyrp’s install.php script in your browser, and follow the instructions. This will probably be somewhere like http://yourserver.com/chyrp/install.php.
  • Delete the install.php file with your FTP client once you’ve finished.

That should get Chyrp up and running! Hopefully one of these days there will be some useful installation instructions included with the download. For such an easy process, it sure was difficult to figure out.

Update: I had an opportunity to install Chyrp again, and you do indeed need to rename .htaccess and make it writable or you’ll get an error about Chyrp not being able to write to the .htaccess file. Please note that these instructions are for Chyrp 1.1.3.2. They may or may not apply to future versions of Chyrp.

The mysterious whining MacBook Pro

I love my MacBook Pro. When they came out, I knew the fifteen inch, top-of-the-line MacBook Pro with an Intel Core Duo was my dream machine, and even though it took me a while to get one, I’ve never looked back. I’d suffered with a 700 pound eMac for so long that I’d forgotten how beautiful a Macintosh can be.

Fast-forward to late 2007 when I’ve graduated from college and somehow managed to acquire an income, an apartment, and a widescreen TV. My TV is also a thing of beauty. Thirty-two inches (which is the perfect size for my living space), 1080p high definition, and a gorgeous shining black surface. It’s a Sharp Aquos 32″ HDTV, and if you’re in the market for a television at that size, I highly recommend it. Beautiful picture, perfect for gaming (which is why I bought it), and the built-in speakers are quite good, as well, which is a major plus because I hate the neighbors thanks to their sound system, and wouldn’t wish to become what I despise.

With two such wonderful gadgets in my house, naturally I wanted them to get together, so I went out and bought an HDMI cable and an audio audio cable to connect the MacBook Pro to the TV. As best I can remember, it worked great the first few times I watched movies.

But the last couple times, as soon as I plugged in the audio cable, the TV started outputting a high-pitched whine through the speakers, which was extremely annoying.

I figured it might be the audio cable, but that didn’t make much sense; it was new and worked fine a few times. Magnetic interference seemed like a long shot, since there was nothing electronic nearby except the TV and the computer itself. Before I rushed off to buy a second audio cable, I decided to consult the internets.

After a little research online, I found there was some info about whining MacBook Pros, but it all had to do with the computer itself whining. Fortunately, Daniel Jalkut had quite a lot to say about CPU whining in MacBook Pros. I tried his QuietMBP program, and surprisingly, it fixed the whine through the television speakers.

Here’s where it gets fun: the QuietMBP program basically uses up idle time in the CPU by running pointless data through it. You can control how often the program runs stuff through the CPU with a slider, and you’re supposed to set the slider as high as you can to alleviate the noise (lower numbers = smaller gaps between CPU usage = more power consumption). I started dragging the slider, and the whine started changing pitch in real time.

Seriously, I could have played music with the damn thing. It was bizarre. Why the heck does a piece of software that’s supposed to help with CPU-related whining change a whine going through external speakers? Why have I never heard a whine through either my computer’s speakers or my trusty JBL Creatures? What god of electronics did I offend, anyway?

It’s baffling to me.

Now that I’m sensitized to the whine, though, I’m realizing that I do sometimes get a strange high-pitched whine when my MacBook Pro is running off battery. Why it took almost two years and a TV to bring this to my attention, I don’t know. Possibly because the eMac was basically a jet engine with a screen on it (think noise, not speed) and my ears have been ringing all this time.

In any case, if you’re experiencing problematic whining when you hook your MacBook Pro up to a pair of external speakers that otherwise behave well, it might not be your cable, your speakers, or really anything involved with getting audio from your Mac to the outside world. It might be your CPU.

Go figure.

Comparing NewsFire and NetNewsWire

For those who are unaware, David Watanabe has released NewsFire for free, a day after updating it to version 1.5 (an update that I was initially not so impressed with). NewsFire is now free the same way that NetNewsWire is free: no restrictions, no ads, no limited version. See the announcement in his own words.

I am really excited that the two best RSS readers on Mac, NewsFire and NetNewsWire, are now both free. Although I’m sure that NetNewsWire will remain the de facto king of the RSS hill on the Mac (it was that before it was freed up), NewsFire is still a compelling option (particularly for users new to feed reading).

Here then is a comprehensive review of NewsFire and NetNewsWire’s strengths and weaknesses; NewsFire vs. NetNewsWire, if you will. Although to be honest, a direct comparison of NewsFire and NetNewsWire is a bit difficult because they approach feed reading from very different directions.

To give you a bit of background, I’d used NewsFire for years up until NetNewsWire was released for free about a little over a month ago. I switched to NetNewsWire because there were several problematic aspects of NewsFire that at the time didn’t seem likely to ever get fixed (it looked like the developer, David Watanabe, had given up on development).

NewsFire

NewsFireNewsFire is a wonderful example of beauty melded with function. Designed to provide easy access to your feeds, NewsFire eschews complicated options for a streamlined interface. I’ll give you an example:

Unlike most news readers, NewsFire does not have a built-in browser for viewing articles full text. When I first tried it, I thought this would be a deal breaker, but it’s actually one of its strengths. OmniWeb (my browser of choice) is a much better browser than any WebKit implementation in a news reader. By not including a browser, NewsFire keeps browsing in the browser, and feeds in the reader.

This is a quintessential example of how NewsFire has been designed. NewsFire does not aim to have a comprehensive feature list. Instead, its goal is to include the most important features for browsing RSS feeds and to execute them stylishly and well.

NewsFire’s interface is a two-pane affair. On the left you have the sidebar, which contains groups (that cannot be nested), smart groups, and feeds. On the right is the main browsing area. When NewsFire finds new headlines, it rearranges the sidebar based on what feeds have been updated (sorting updated feeds by name, number of updates, or which has the most recent item based on your preferences). Feeds whoosh around as they’re updated, which is fun, if functionally useless.

The main browsing area is where you’ll spend most of your time, though, and its layout is what I still miss about NewsFire. In the New Items smart group (where you’ll spend most of your time), the main browsing area looks like this:

NewsFire's main browsing area

I find that sorting by feed in the New Items smart group is the best way to navigate through NewsFire. As you can see, headlines are grouped under their feed, and if there’s a lot of headlines they’re hidden behind a link. Aside from being clean and appealing, this layout makes quickly skimming through your feeds very easy to do. I don’t know about everyone, but for me there are some feeds I subscribe to that I want to read every single headline and others whose headlines I just want to skim. Thanks to NewsFire’s organization, I can quickly scan down the list, knowing exactly what headlines deserve more attention and which less because I always know which feed I’m looking at.

To read a headline, you just click it and its content replaces the list in the main browsing area. This may sound a bit untenable to people used to a three-pane interface, but it works surprisingly well. The list of updates is merely a click or keyboard shortcut away, and if you want you can stay in the full-text view and quickly skip from new headline to new headline with mouse or keyboard, opening interesting links in the browser behind NewsFire as you go.

NewsFire’s preferences offer a number of options for tweaking the appearance and behavior to meet your needs, but the basic look and feel of the program doesn’t change. This relative inflexibility is NewsFire’s primary weakness. If the way it presents information makes sense to you, then you’ll probably love NewsFire. If it doesn’t, you’ll may find yourself wondering why anyone would use the application in the first place.

NewsFire’s other main weakness isn’t the software: it’s the developer. David Watanabe is, at best, unresponsive to customers. At worst, he’s hostile (or so I’ve heard; never having received a response I don’t actually know first-hand). There may well be some people who have had their emails answered, but personally, I’ve never even received an acknowledgement that he received a feedback email from me, and judging from the responses I’ve seen around the internet, this is probably the best I can hope for. Particularly now that NewsFire is free, I suspect that support will be even more nonexistent. If that isn’t a contradiction in terms.

Any other weaknesses are basically minor quibbles, although they can add up over time. The one that pushed me from NewsFire to NetNewsWire was the fact that NewsFire gives you no indication of whether it’s downloading headlines or not. If you have a lot of feeds this can become an issue because the New Items smart group resets whenever a new item is added to it. For instance:

You notice a green number in NewsFire’s dock icon, which means there’s new feeds. You switch to the program and start to scroll through the New Items list. Although you didn’t know it, NewsFire is still fetching headlines, and a new feed is added to the list. The scrollbar jumps to the top and you, lucky devil, get to start over again. If you happened to be reading the full text of an item, when you return to the list you’ll be returned to the top of the list and all the read items will have been removed (if you’re reading outside of an active update, they stick around until you’re done, making it easier to keep your place). It’s a small thing, but it gets really, really annoying over time.

What’s perplexing to me is that there’s a progress indicator in the screenshot on NewsFire’s homepage. I’ve been refreshing feeds and never seen it, though, so I presume it only shows up if a podcast or video is being downloaded. I’d email Watanabe to ask if I thought I’d get a response.

Despite these downsides, if you try NewsFire and the way it presents feeds makes sense you to, you’ll probably love it. Unless you find a feature that annoys you (like the lack of a progress indicator for me), you’ll probably never care about Watanabe’s substandard support because NewsFire is rock solid.

And on the other hand, NetNewsWire

NetNewsWireNetNewsWire approaches RSS feeds from a very different direction. Where NewsFire has taken a single approach to feeds, slimmed it down, and made it as appealing as possible, NetNewsWire has taken a basic three-pane interface, familiar to any Mail user, and then opened up the possibilities.

You can customize just about everything in NetNewsWire, which for a first-time user can be quite overwhelming (I know it was for me). There’s something for everyone in NetNewsWire; the tricky part is finding it.

Although it offers a combined view that is similar to NewsFire’s (if an inferior implementation), NetNewsWire’s standard presentation of feeds uses a Mail-like list, with information about the headlines presented in columns. Because it’s more difficult to keep track of what headlines are in what feeds (if you’re skimming through the Latest News list), NetNewsWire encourages a slightly more leisurely way of navigating. In the sidebar, you can nest groups inside of one another, and it’s often more useful to group feeds and then browse the groups rather than trolling through the whole list of headlines.

One of my favorite features, and an excellent example of the customizability behind NetNewsWire, is the ability to choose different themes for displaying full-text for headlines. Whether you want to add a little color to your feed browsing or pick a style that delivers the information as clearly as possible (I highly recommend Simply Structured if you’re going for the latter), custom styles let you make NetNewsWire your own in a way completely impossible in NewsFire.

To be quite honest, there isn’t much more to say about NetNewsWire. I couldn’t possibly cover all its features because there’s so many different options. Suffice it to say that NetNewsWire is a professional, well-refined news reader with a high amount of flexibility and power. Although it may be more difficult to just pick up and use (particularly if you are not familiar with RSS feed readers), once you’ve tweaked it to work the way you want, you’ll be very happy with it.

As far as support, I can’t really comment. Given that NewsGator is a company (rather than an indie developer), I suspect you’ll be more likely to receive support if you ask for it, and I know that Brent Simmons (the developer) takes user feature requests and so forth seriously, even if (in my limited experience) he doesn’t respond to them, either.

Looking forward

NewsFire’s release as a free product is not likely to cut into NetNewsWire’s dominance. Although a few people might be tempted to switch, overall NetNewsWire users are probably too used to the three-pane approach and multiplicity of options that NetNewsWire provides. However, for people newly in the market for a feed reader, or for people to whom NewsFire’s workflow makes a lot of sense, NewsFire is a strong contender.

For people new to feed reading, I recommend trying NewsFire first. Its approach to feeds will either make a lot of sense to you or it won’t. In the former case, you’ll be happy with NewsFire for some time. In the latter, you can easily switch over to NetNewsWire and try it out. NewsFire has a much smaller learning curve (practically nonexistent), so it’s an excellent introduction to the world of feed reading, whereas NetNewsWire has a steeper learning curve but is likely to appeal to people who want fine-grained control.

There are a few thing to consider beyond the applications themselves, though. NetNewsWire is clearly going to be better supported and has a much higher likelihood of getting updated than NewsFire because it’s backed by a company whose business is feed reading. NewsFire, on the other hand, is now a free offering from an indie developer who hadn’t been updating it much even before NetNewsWire went free. I suspect that long-term NewsFire will end up stagnating.

I hope I’m wrong, of course; I think that NewsFire has a lot of potential if Watanabe puts more effort into it, but given that he’s now released it into the wild this seems less likely. It was in NewsGators’ best interest to free NetNewsWire because doing so adds value to their other products. It is much less in Watanabe’s interest to free NewsFire because all it gives him is a better chance of gaining new users (who, granted, may then end up buying his other software). It may be that Watanabe has decided to give NewsFire a slow death rather than the quick one that it was headed for thanks to NetNewsWire’s drastic price change.

But enough gloomy suppositions! At least for the near future, users have the happy ability to choose between two excellent feed readers, both absolutely free. Despite my pessimistic opinions about NewsFire’s long-term outlook (and Watanabe could well prove me wrong; fingers crossed), right now NewsFire is still a very compelling option for people who don’t need or want the power of NetNewsWire.

I’m pretty excited that NewsFire is now free, actually. Despite its ubiquitousness, feed reading still seems to be confined largely to technophiles and the web savvy. Hopefully two commercial quality free Mac feed readers will encourage more everyday users to try feed reading for themselves.

Update: in a response to a comment on his blog, David Watanabe speaks out about NewsFire’s future: “I have design and feature plans for 2.0. Whether or not those plans translate into reality is up to too many variables for me to comment. Right now my priority is Xtorrent.” Here’s hoping that those variables work themselves out, and he does continue to update NewsFire!

NewsFire 1.5

And NewsFire 1.5 is released with…a larger next button.

NewsFire 1.5's flagship feature: a larger next button

Here is my excitement at finally seeing a new version of NewsFire. Here is my excitement comically deflating to the sounds of trumpets going wah wah waaah.

Although there isn’t a link anywhere on NewsFire’s new, information-less website, you can still see the release notes for 1.5 if you know where to look. Given that nothing substantial appears to have been changed, I guess I’ll continue to use NetNewsWire. I used to love NewsFire, but the small annoyances, coupled with the fact that David Watanabe appears to hate his customers, finally forced me to migrate to NetNewsWire.

I have to admit, though, I still kind of miss NewsFire’s all-in-one list of headlines. NetNewsWire is far more difficult to skim through. Ah well. I shall toil on.

Impending fiction

I’ve been doing some writing exercises, and I’m finally back in the short story zone. So keep a weather eye out for the first piece of new short fiction on Beckism.com in quite a while.

Obviously, this post itself is largely pointless (”oooh, fiction is coming! Be excited or something!”), but I published it because I have a question: are people going to be totally weirded out if I publish short fiction full text, just like my non-fiction articles? I’ve got a system in place that will let me use an excerpt or teaser (Dirt Man is currently using it), but I want people to read this stuff, dammit. And I know when I’m a first-time visitor to a blog, I almost never click through a “read more” link.

Your thoughts are welcome and appreciated. And if no one speaks up, then I’ll just quietly start slipping bits of fiction onto the site, because I miss making stuff up and putting it online.

Track me like a stalker:
  • Tagamac
  • Twitter
Clicky Web Analytics