rowan.depomerai

Researchers at Cambridge University used data from 150 rounds of The X Factor and Pop Idol to see whether their running orders had any effect on weekly results.

Dr Lionel Page, who was one of the academics behind the investigation, said that no acts have been eliminated after singing last on the current series.

He explained: "In week one, Kandy Rain went out and they were second on, in week three Miss Frank left after being third on. John and Edward Grimes went when they were third on and Lloyd Daniels was voted out after being the second person to perform.

"If the show is about singing, it shouldn't matter if they were performing first or last. But it does."

Good to see Cambridge living up to their reputation for cutting edge important research here...

West Wing Creator Aaron Sorkin to Return to TV

By Scott Huver  November 17, 2009 11:06 AM EST

West Wing creator Aaron Sorkin isn’t just planning to return to television after a stint in the film world. He’s planning another series set behind the scenes of a television show.

Sorkin tells TVGuideMagazine.comthat – like his previous series Sports Night (set around an ESPN-style sports news show) and Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip (set around a Saturday Night Live-esque sketch comedy show) – his next effort will take place backstage on yet another TV series.

"I'm going to be starting on a new TV series" when filming is done on the upcoming movie "The Social Network," the Sorkin-penned account of the founding of Facebook directed by David Fincher, he says. "It's going to be what turns out to be the third in the trilogy of TV shows that take place behind the scenes of a TV show, but this will be a different kind of TV show. That's all I can let out of the bag right now.”

Sorkin said he “hopes” to reunite on the project with at least some of the actors he’s worked with previously. “If you're a writer, when you're find an actor like Josh Malina, Felicity Huffman, Brad Whitford, Matt Perry, Allison Janney, Richard Schiff, all these great actors that I've worked with, you just want to stick them in your pocket and work with them forever, so I hope so.” He also expects to be working with director and longtime collaborator Tommy Schlamme “for sure.”

EXCITED!

One of the things that people say an awful lot about the Apple Mac is that the OS is fantastic, that it’s very graphical and easy to use. What we’ve tried to do with Windows 7 – whether it’s traditional format or in a touch format – is create a Mac look and feel in terms of graphics.

Interesting to see Microasoft's Simon Aldous admit this so explicitly in black and white. Yet while Windows 7 is a big step forward, I'm not sure they yet understand the relationship of "easy to use" and "graphical". Pretty doesn't automatically mean easy to use, Apple try (often successfully, though not always) to make their software meet both criteria. I often wonder if Microsoft think that making something pretty makes it easier to use.

(Also, don't get me started on him claiming that Vista is "far more stable than the current Mac platform". You're telling me Vista, the most derided OS in history, is more stable than a modern UNIX OS? I think both Mac fans and users of various other UNIX/Linux operating systems would love to challenge you on that.)

Remember the price war that was supposed to break out once O2 lost its exclusive contract to sell the iPhone in Britain?

Well, the price plans that Orange has published for the phone show little sign of an eagerness for hand-to-hand combat.

[...]

But what does stand out when you examine Orange's price card more closely is what it says about the unlimited data that has been an essential part of the iPhone's appeal.

An asterisk next to the "unlimited" leads to a note saying "Fair Usage policy of 750MB/ month applies." Cue plenty of grumbling from potential customers, particularly on Twitter.

[...]

Last night someone pointed me towards this clause in Orange's Terms and Conditions:

"Not to be used for other activities (eg using your handset as a modem, non-Orange internet based streaming services, voice or video over the internet, instant messaging, peer to peer file sharing, non-Orange internet based video). Should such use be detected notice may be given and Network protection controls applied to all services which Orange does not believe constitutes mobile browsing."

It sounds as though services like Spotify, AudioBoo, Ustream and even Facebook messaging - increasingly popular with O2 iPhone customers - will be out of bounds for Orange users.

[...]

The problem for the operators is that users no longer see the iPhone and similar devices as phones but as small computers. And who wants to be told 25 days into each month that they must now stop playing around with their computer and just use it to make calls?

The Beeb using some clever technology to allow you to search video to find chunks where MPs, Lords and MEPs use words you search for. Interesting...

How the tabloids don't have much right to criticise the BBC allowing the BNP on-air. I highly recommend reading the whole thing: http://enemiesofreason.blogspot.com/2009/10/hmm-remember-this.html

It goes without saying that Nick Griffin is a hateful, slippery character. Unfortunately he and other BNP members are getting good at running rings around journalists and others who want to ask them questions.

To help anyone wondering what to ask the BNP leader when he appears on the BBC's Question Time on Thursday, I've prepared, with the help of my co-bloggers, a list of 20 questions that should be asked of the BNP and its leadership. So without further ado...

A good article - I'd love to see some of these questions answered.

Great stuff - I've always liked the FedEx one, but there's a few here I hadn't spotted.

The most nauseating advert in history? The Windows 7 ‘launch party’

I admit it: I'm a bigot. A hopeless bigot at that: I know my particular prejudice is absurd, but I just can't control it. It's Apple. I don't like Apple products. And the better-designed and more ubiquitous they become, the more I dislike them. I blame the customers. Awful people. Awful. Stop showing me your iPhone. Stop stroking your Macbook. Stop telling me to get one.

Seriously, stop it. I don't care if Mac stuff is better. I don't care if Mac stuff is cool. I don't care if every Mac product comes equipped a magic button on the side that causes it to piddle gold coins and resurrect the dead and make holographic unicorns dance inside your head. I'm not buying one, so shut up and go home. Go back to your house. I know, you've got an iHouse. The walls are brushed aluminum. There's a glowing Apple logo on the roof. And you love it there. You absolute MONSTER.

Of course, it's safe to assume Mac products are indeed as brilliant as their owners make out. Why else would they spend so much time trying to convert non-believers? They're not getting paid. They simply want to spread their happiness, like religious crusaders.

Consequently, nothing pleases them more than watching a PC owner struggle with a slab of non-Mac machinery. It validates their spiritual choice. Recently I sat in a room trying to write something on a Sony Vaio PC laptop which seemed to be running a special slow-motion edition of Windows Vista specifically designed to infuriate human beings as much as possible. Trying to get it to do anything was like issuing instructions to a depressed employee over a sluggish satellite feed. When I clicked on an application it spent a small eternity contemplating the philosophical implications of opening it, begrudgingly complying with my request several months later. It drove me up the wall. I called it a bastard and worse. At one point I punched a table.

This drew the attention of two nearby Mac owners. They hovered over and stood beside me, like placid monks.

"Ah: the delights of Vista," said one.

"It really is time you got a Mac," said the other.

"They're just better," sang monk number one.

"You won't regret it," whispered the second.

I scowled and returned to my infernal machine, like a dishevelled park-bench boozer shrugging away two pious AA recruiters by pulling a grubby, dented hip flask from his pocket and pointedly taking an extra deep swig. Leave me alone, I thought. I don't care if you're right. I just want you to die.

I know Windows is awful. Everyone knows Windows is awful. Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it. OK, OK: I know other operating systems are available. But their advocates seem even creepier, snootier and more insistent than Mac owners. The harder they try to convince me, the more I'm repelled. To them, I'm a sheep. And they're right. I'm a helpless, stupid, lazy sheep. I'm also a masochist. And that's why I continue to use Windows – horrible Windows – even though I hate every second of it. It's grim, it's slow, everything's badly designed and nothing really works properly: using Windows is like living in a communist bloc nation circa 1981. And I wouldn't change it for the world, because I'm an abject bloody idiot and I hate myself, and this is what I deserve: to be sentenced to Windows for life.

That's why Windows works for me. But I'd never recommend it to anybody else, ever. This puts me in line with roughly everybody else in the world. No one has ever earnestly turned to a fellow human being and said, "Hey, have you considered Windows?" Not in the real world at any rate.

Until now. Microsoft, hellbent on tackling the conspicuous lack of word-of-mouth recommendation, is encouraging people – real people – to host "Windows 7 launch parties" to celebrate the 22 October release of, er, Windows 7. The idea is that you invite a group of friends – your real friends – to your home – your real home – and entertain them with a series of Windows 7 tutorials. So you show them how to burn a CD, how to make a little video, how to change the wallpaper, and how to, oh no, hang on it's not supposed to do that, oh, I think it's frozen, um, er, let me just, um, no that's not it, um, er, um, er, so how's it going with you and Kathy anyway, um, er, OK well see you around I guess.

To assist the party-hosting massive, they've also uploaded a series of spectacularly cringeworthy videos to YouTube, in which the four most desperate actors in the world stand around in a kitchen sharing tips on how best to indoctrinate guests in the wonder of Windows. If they were staring straight down the lens reading hints off a card it might be acceptable; instead they have been instructed to pretend to be friends. The result is the most nauseating display of artificial camaraderie since the horrific Doritos "Friendchips" TV campaign (which caused 50,000 people to kill themselves in 2003, or should have done).

It's so terrible, it induces an entirely new emotion: a blend of vertigo, disgust, anger and embarrassment which I like to call "shitasmia". It not only creates this emotion: it defines it. It's the most shitasmic cultural artefact in history. Watch it for yourself.

Still, bad though it is, I vaguely prefer the clumping, clueless, uncool, crappiness of Microsoft's bland Stepford gang to the creepy assurance of the average Mac evangelist. At least the grinning dildos in the Windows video are fictional, whereas eerie replicant Mac monks really are everywhere, standing over your shoulder in their charcoal pullovers, smirking with amusement at your hopelessly inferior OS, knowing they're better than you because they use Mac OS X v10.6 Snow Leopard.

Snow Leopard. SNOW LEOPARD.

I don't care if you're right. I just want you to die.

Charlie Brooker being a legend. As always. Even if he does want me to die.

A perfectly blank sheet of white paper is a tool of infinite possibility. For input you could use a pencil, a pen, a crayon, a marker, a stamp, a brush or more. You could use all of those at once. You can write or draw or paint in any direction. Even multiple directions on the same sheet. You can use any color you want. How you enter data onto it and how that information is structured seems almost limitless. That flexibility and power is available to you because of it’s lack of features. In fact, it is featureless - devoid of them.

Let’s add a feature. Let’s put some ruled lines on the paper. Make no mistake, this feature adds value. It allows me to be able to write neatly by using the lines as a guide. This makes the data more legible by providing a structure for me to follow. It also has a cost. It takes away some of the flexibility. Could I still write sideways in opposite direction of the lines? Sure. Am I likely to? No. Why? Well, it would go against the provided structure and thus make the data less legible. Ruled lines would intersect and, to a small extent, obscure my words and drawings.

OK, next feature - A box at the top left corner of the short end of the page. Perfect. That empty box has some value. Perhaps I could write a date in there. Perhaps I could use a colored marker to fill it in - color code the page. Perhaps I could put the name of the project that this piece of paper belongs to. Does the box take away from the available free space on the page? Sure it does. It is a trade off though. What I give up in space I gain in value right? Well, that depends on the perspective of the individual, but I think I like it.

Enough on that. Let’s add a feature to that box we added. Lets pre-print what we think people should use that box for. You know, to make it clearer for the end user. Let’s print a label in that box called “Title”. Perfect. Now I have added value by reducing the amount of thought a user of this paper has to put into figuring out why that box is there, right? I think you can now see where I am going with this…

I think it is far too easy to look at the addition of features to anything - hardware, software, analog, digital, even a simple piece of blank paper - as a benefit without also recognizing the associated and often forgotten cost.

In the world of hardware and software, the companies, developers, and tools that get it right weigh the cost of adding features heavily and take every feature addition under great consideration. In fact, they reject most feature requests right out of the starting gate. They appreciate feature requests but more often than not read them and ignore them. They simply let the signal rise above the noise to determine what features to add. When they do add a feature, they do it in the most unobtrusive and seamless way possible. They are careful to make sure the value far outweighs the cost.

The costs do not stop there. In fact, if you add a feature you now have to support that feature if it breaks or does not work as the user expects it to. Also, adding a feature could actually lose you a sale. Those of us (I am not alone) who are feature wary may opt for something else just for the simplicity.

This does not mean that you cannot have a ton of features yet still maintain flexibility. One example is TextMate. TextMate is a very powerful text editing program for the Mac. It is chock full of features and has a robust plug in architecture that allows you to add even more. Yet all that power is hidden in the UI. When you launch TextMate all you see is a blank white page ready for input. The features are not in your way. If you just want to get some writing done in plain text you have the only feature you need right there. The power is not there unless you need it and then mostly as a menu item optionally accessible via a keyboard shortcut.

On the other hand, Notes.app on the iPhone is very basic in features. You can take notes, you can email a note, and that is about it. But that is what makes it great. You can use Notes.app any way you want. Type up a blog post draft. Enter in a book recommendation. Make a shopping list. Note the dimensions of that room you need to buy furniture for. In fact, it’s lack of features and structure are what provide it’s true power.

As you can see from these two disparate examples, It is not about not adding features. Features in and of themselves are not a problem. It is about adding the right features and only the right ones. I like ruled paper with a predefined area for a title and date just like the next guy. It is about understanding that for every added feature there is a cost and not forgetting to consider that.

This is a great little article. It's on a theme I've been planning to contemplate in a blog post of my own - simplicity. It's what makes Twitter great and what often - though not always - pushes Apple ahead of its rivals. Interesting stuff...