Gripes

...now browsing by category

 

Flickr and G+, followup

Sunday, August 21st, 2011

Yesterday I mentioned how Google+ is far superior for interaction.  It seems that I missed a thread on Metafilter titled “Flickring Out” where similar thoughts were brought up.  Among the more interesting points, things to not forget:

  • Thomas Hawk doesn’t exist.  He’s really Andrew Petersen, a San-Francisco-based stockbroker (direct link).
  • The overall consensus of Hawk isn’t terribly positive.  Similar to my own. I do find it interesting that people criticize his work, when in my mind it is very much subjective.
  • A link (from here) to the most important page on Flickr. Yes indeed: the contacts page is indeed quite a mess. This ties in to my complaints about comments.
  • There is a definite feeling that Yahoo has killed Flickr.  Flickr, after their previous layoffs, has definitely lost their key supporters.
  • There is a feeling that the quality of photographers has dropped.  I believe they are heading for 500px and similar sites, where they are taken more seriously.
  • I get a feeling that Flickr has become a commodity to Yahoo.  They are turning into the Budweiser of photo-sharing sites.
  • There are multiple complaints from people that their comments/contacts have dropped off.  I have noticed the same.
Share

Dropping the WSJ Photoblog

Saturday, August 28th, 2010

As a follow-up to this post, I went back to the WSJ site.  They’re still using that inadvisable multi-page format, so I’ve done the logical thing: dropped them from the list of blogs that I follow.

If you’ve never followed them, here’s why I liked them: they had timely photos, in large sizes that made an excellent addendum to the news.

This is similar to The Big Picture, who remains on my lists. The WSJ covers many subjects each day.  The Big Picture focuses on a single subject, but in depth.  They normally worked very well together, supplementing each other’s content. Dare I say: there was synergy, having them both in the same blogroll.

So now out goes the WSJ. Is there a replacement that won’t irritate me to the point of vulgarity?  If so, I haven’t found it yet.

Note: I know, the LA Times has tried to follow the WSJ’s lead with their Framework site.  Somehow they have managed to make it even more frustrating than the WSJ’s site.

Share

Throwing some Hate towards the WSJ

Wednesday, August 4th, 2010
Multiple pages - really, why?

Multiple pages - really, why?

I have somewhat of a minor gripe, but it really burns my britches.  So just like that, you’ll have to deal with it.  The gripe: the WSJ photoblog has changed their format.  It used to be that you would click on the page, and it would load (albeit slowly, sometimes – there are a lot of high-quality pictures there, usually). Starting a short while ago, with a short hiatus which ended today, they shifted the format: you load the day’s photos, and then there are more pages of photos.  There might be two or three pages.

The main gripe: when I’m looking at pictures online, I’m in the zone.  Particularly if it’s news-related.  With the WSJ now, I get to the bottom and… have to wait for the next page to load.  Just a few seconds?  Eff you: I’m on the other side of the country.  It takes a while. This multi-page policy completely interrupts the flow of my reading.

Think like this: you’re reading a great article on the front page of a newspaper. It tells you to skip to the back.  Now, in the middle of the article: stop the person for two minutes.  Hell, stop me for twenty seconds: concentration is completely lost, and I might as well not read the article at all.  The interruption has to be small.

But it’s not small.  Twenty seconds would be a dream, where I’m at – and in any case, it prevents me from going backwards, or scrolling up and down.

The thing is, I’m not really sure *why* this is.  It’s not like the extra pages do anything other than piss people off.  Are they so desperate for ad revenue that they want the single ad at the top to get two more impressions?

Really, it’s senseless.

Share

The San Diego Museum of Art Blows

Sunday, July 25th, 2010
Museum of Art Entrance at Balboa Park

Museum of Art Entrance at Balboa Park

How’s that for an incendiary title?  I suppose I should backtrack slightly and explain myself: during a recent trip to southern California, we stopped by Balboa Park. Great place, and it happened to have some wonderful things going on for children.  Acrobats, stencil drawing (Persian-style) on tile, block-painting (very lithographic).

My daughter loved it all, so therefore I loved it.

Until we hit the SD MOA, that is. We were greeted at the door by a cheerful woman, welcoming us in.  “Entry is free,” she informed us, “but no cameras and no drinks. You have to leave your bags at the front.” With this, she gestured to a side room where there was a check-in service. Click to continue »

Share

Apologies to B&H, et al.

Sunday, June 27th, 2010

I tried, guys – I really did.  I wanted to buy from you.  I always want to buy from you, or someone – anyone – who specializes in photography.

Don’t get me wrong: I love the convenience of Amazon, but when it comes to quality listings and specialized knowledge I like to stick with the specialists. Like you.

Unfortunately, you don’t like me.  I live in another country, as far as you’re concerned.  Like our brothers & sisters in Puerto Rico or Hawaii, you add the “not us” tax.  Contiguous 48 states?  Free shipping!  Alaska?  Twenty bucks minimum, give or take. It’s probably worse in Hawaii.

I just wanted a monopod – figured I’d grab one & reward The Online Photographer at the same time.  Add on a head & a tabletop tripod and you’ve got my order.  And your prices: on par with everything Amazon offered, even a tad cheaper.

But with shipping?  12% more expensive.

And that’s why I order from Amazon every other month, but from you guys only once every other year.  It adds up, guys.

It adds up.

Share

What would you do with a cliche?

Saturday, June 12th, 2010

Flower pics. Looking at ‘em close. Sure is purty! But heck yeah, quite the cliche.

Little blue (bell-shaped) flowers

Little blue (bell-shaped) flowers

So, what would you do with this? It’s just not working for me…

Share

A frustration with the G11

Tuesday, May 18th, 2010

Good God, is it slow to take a picture. I haven’t experienced this slow of a burst mode since 1999! Maybe that’s just luck, but it doesn’t seem so. 

Rather, it seems that there’s no buffer. Instead of taking shots until memory is filled up, it just takes ‘em one at a time. Which puts you at the mercy of the disk write speed. 

Even with a professional SD card, it’s painfully slow. Forget about using this with your kids…

Share

Things I Hate: Multi-Level Marketing

Monday, April 19th, 2010

Up there near the top of my list right now is multi-level marketing.  Just a hair of a step below pyramid schemes and just this side of being illegal. Usually.  Let’s start by getting on the same page – or better yet, Wikipedia’s page.

The main things to take away:

[Distributors] are awarded a commission based upon the volume of product sold through their own sales efforts as well as that of their downline organization.

and

Independent distributors develop their organizations by either building an active customer base, who buy direct from the company, or by recruiting a downline of independent distributors who also build a customer base, thereby expanding the overall organization

Click to continue »

Share

“To Serve you Better”

Monday, April 19th, 2010

If there’s one phrase I hate coming from *anyone*, it’s the title to this post.  No one ever changes how they do things to serve you better – they do it to serve themselves better.

That’s it.  Period.  Click to continue »

Share

For the record

Sunday, April 18th, 2010

If I complain, gripe, or criticize anyone on this blog, it is purely my opinion.  Nothing else.

Further, if I comment on anyone or complain about anyone’s actions, do not expect me to post their names or give links.  It’s not a matter of fearing lawsuits (although some might consider it stupid *not* to).  Rather, I wouldn’t do them the favor of giving them the free advertising.

Share