第一篇是Middleware and Section 3.3.1

One such “painful experience”, from Apple’s perspective, would be Metrowerks’s PowerPlant framework. PowerPlant was a GUI toolkit and application framework for the classic Mac OS, which shipped with Metrowerks’s CodeWarrior compiler and IDE. It was very good, and very popular — many popular Mac apps were built using the PowerPlant framework.

在Steves Jobs的文章裡提到了讓第三方開發平台帶來的「痛苦經驗」，但是這個痛苦經驗是什麼呢？JOHN GRUBER認為是Metrowerks的PowerPlant framework。當蘋果從OS 9過渡到OS X時，因為PowerPlant framework非常普及又沒有跟著OS X支援新的API，造成大量建築在PowerPlant framework之上的軟體沒辦法跟著OS X的腳步前進。PowerPlant framework成為Apple在發展OS X的痛。

第二篇是The Real Story Behind Adobe’s Failed Mobile Strategy

But within the past few years, Adobe’s focus shifted from being at the top of its class solely to growing its bottom line. Cost-cutting became the company’s priority as each year brought no less than 10% in staff cuts. Naturally, the engineering teams became demoralized as they knew every Q4, after they shipped the product they were working on and after putting in long hours, their jobs could be shipped out as well. The executive team’s quality-killing concentration on profits started adversely affecting not only the products that made Adobe what it is today, but also its design strategy and adaptability to the changing industry.

這篇文章的可看之處在於把Adobe這邊的故事。不管Flash VS HTML5之間的技術細節誰是誰非，這篇文章解答了Flash這邊本身的許多問題。為什麼Flash問題這麼多？過去Flash Lite的成功怎麼沒有維持下去？對我來說，還有為什麼CS5系列品質這麼讓人不滿意？（尤其是Fireworks CS5最為誇張）

第三篇是The real reason why Steve Jobs hates Flash

I’ve got a theory, and it’s this: Steve Jobs believes he’s gambling Apple’s future — the future of a corporation with a market cap well over US $200Bn — on an all-or-nothing push into a new market. HP have woken up and smelled the forest fire, two or three years late; Microsoft are mired in a tar pit, unable to grasp that the inferno heading towards them is going to burn down the entire ecosystem in which they exist. There is the smell of panic in the air, and here’s why …

這篇文章的試圖分析Steve Jobs對Flash開火的真正原音。Steve Jobs討厭Flash可能不是因為現在表面上的技術問題，也可能不是因為Steve Jobs所謂最重要的第六點，而是為了十年後或是更久之後的大戰略。相當精彩的文章。

這三篇文章剛好代表了過去，現在與未來，在這邊推薦大家閱讀。

Thoughts on Flash

Apple has a long relationship with Adobe. In fact, we met Adobe’s founders when they were in their proverbial garage. Apple was their first big customer, adopting their Postscript language for our new Laserwriter printer. Apple invested in Adobe and owned around 20% of the company for many years. The two companies worked closely together to pioneer desktop publishing and there were many good times. Since that golden era, the companies have grown apart. Apple went through its near death experience, and Adobe was drawn to the corporate market with their Acrobat products. Today the two companies still work together to serve their joint creative customers – Mac users buy around half of Adobe’s Creative Suite products – but beyond that there are few joint interests.

I wanted to jot down some of our thoughts on Adobe’s Flash products so that customers and critics may better understand why we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. Adobe has characterized our decision as being primarily business driven – they say we want to protect our App Store – but in reality it is based on technology issues. Adobe claims that we are a closed system, and that Flash is open, but in fact the opposite is true. Let me explain.

First, there’s “Open”.

Adobe’s Flash products are 100% proprietary. They are only available from Adobe, and Adobe has sole authority as to their future enhancement, pricing, etc. While Adobe’s Flash products are widely available, this does not mean they are open, since they are controlled entirely by Adobe and available only from Adobe. By almost any definition, Flash is a closed system.

Apple has many proprietary products too. Though the operating system for the iPhone, iPod and iPad is proprietary, we strongly believe that all standards pertaining to the web should be open. Rather than use Flash, Apple has adopted HTML5, CSS and JavaScript – all open standards. Apple’s mobile devices all ship with high performance, low power implementations of these open standards. HTML5, the new web standard that has been adopted by Apple, Google and many others, lets web developers create advanced graphics, typography, animations and transitions without relying on third party browser plug-ins (like Flash). HTML5 is completely open and controlled by a standards committee, of which Apple is a member.

Apple even creates open standards for the web. For example, Apple began with a small open source project and created WebKit, a complete open-source HTML5 rendering engine that is the heart of the Safari web browser used in all our products. WebKit has been widely adopted. Google uses it for Android’s browser, Palm uses it, Nokia uses it, and RIM (Blackberry) has announced they will use it too. Almost every smartphone web browser other than Microsoft’s uses WebKit. By making its WebKit technology open, Apple has set the standard for mobile web browsers.

Second, there’s the “full web”.

Adobe has repeatedly said that Apple mobile devices cannot access “the full web” because 75% of video on the web is in Flash. What they don’t say is that almost all this video is also available in a more modern format, H.264, and viewable on iPhones, iPods and iPads. YouTube, with an estimated 40% of the web’s video, shines in an app bundled on all Apple mobile devices, with the iPad offering perhaps the best YouTube discovery and viewing experience ever. Add to this video from Vimeo, Netflix, Facebook, ABC, CBS, CNN, MSNBC, Fox News, ESPN, NPR, Time, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Sports Illustrated, People, National Geographic, and many, many others. iPhone, iPod and iPad users aren’t missing much video.

Another Adobe claim is that Apple devices cannot play Flash games. This is true. Fortunately, there are over 50,000 games and entertainment titles on the App Store, and many of them are free. There are more games and entertainment titles available for iPhone, iPod and iPad than for any other platform in the world.

Third, there’s reliability, security and performance.

Symantec recently highlighted Flash for having one of the worst security records in 2009. We also know first hand that Flash is the number one reason Macs crash. We have been working with Adobe to fix these problems, but they have persisted for several years now. We don’t want to reduce the reliability and security of our iPhones, iPods and iPads by adding Flash.

In addition, Flash has not performed well on mobile devices. We have routinely asked Adobe to show us Flash performing well on a mobile device, any mobile device, for a few years now. We have never seen it. Adobe publicly said that Flash would ship on a smartphone in early 2009, then the second half of 2009, then the first half of 2010, and now they say the second half of 2010. We think it will eventually ship, but we’re glad we didn’t hold our breath. Who knows how it will perform?

Fourth, there’s battery life.

To achieve long battery life when playing video, mobile devices must decode the video in hardware; decoding it in software uses too much power. Many of the chips used in modern mobile devices contain a decoder called H.264 – an industry standard that is used in every Blu-ray DVD player and has been adopted by Apple, Google (YouTube), Vimeo, Netflix and many other companies.

Although Flash has recently added support for H.264, the video on almost all Flash websites currently requires an older generation decoder that is not implemented in mobile chips and must be run in software. The difference is striking: on an iPhone, for example, H.264 videos play for up to 10 hours, while videos decoded in software play for less than 5 hours before the battery is fully drained.

When websites re-encode their videos using H.264, they can offer them without using Flash at all. They play perfectly in browsers like Apple’s Safari and Google’s Chrome without any plugins whatsoever, and look great on iPhones, iPods and iPads.

Fifth, there’s Touch.

Flash was designed for PCs using mice, not for touch screens using fingers. For example, many Flash websites rely on “rollovers”, which pop up menus or other elements when the mouse arrow hovers over a specific spot. Apple’s revolutionary multi-touch interface doesn’t use a mouse, and there is no concept of a rollover. Most Flash websites will need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices. If developers need to rewrite their Flash websites, why not use modern technologies like HTML5, CSS and JavaScript?

Even if iPhones, iPods and iPads ran Flash, it would not solve the problem that most Flash websites need to be rewritten to support touch-based devices.

Sixth, the most important reason.

Besides the fact that Flash is closed and proprietary, has major technical drawbacks, and doesn’t support touch based devices, there is an even more important reason we do not allow Flash on iPhones, iPods and iPads. We have discussed the downsides of using Flash to play video and interactive content from websites, but Adobe also wants developers to adopt Flash to create apps that run on our mobile devices.

We know from painful experience that letting a third party layer of software come between the platform and the developer ultimately results in sub-standard apps and hinders the enhancement and progress of the platform. If developers grow dependent on third party development libraries and tools, they can only take advantage of platform enhancements if and when the third party chooses to adopt the new features. We cannot be at the mercy of a third party deciding if and when they will make our enhancements available to our developers.

This becomes even worse if the third party is supplying a cross platform development tool. The third party may not adopt enhancements from one platform unless they are available on all of their supported platforms. Hence developers only have access to the lowest common denominator set of features. Again, we cannot accept an outcome where developers are blocked from using our innovations and enhancements because they are not available on our competitor’s platforms.

Flash is a cross platform development tool. It is not Adobe’s goal to help developers write the best iPhone, iPod and iPad apps. It is their goal to help developers write cross platform apps. And Adobe has been painfully slow to adopt enhancements to Apple’s platforms. For example, although Mac OS X has been shipping for almost 10 years now, Adobe just adopted it fully (Cocoa) two weeks ago when they shipped CS5. Adobe was the last major third party developer to fully adopt Mac OS X.

Our motivation is simple – we want to provide the most advanced and innovative platform to our developers, and we want them to stand directly on the shoulders of this platform and create the best apps the world has ever seen. We want to continually enhance the platform so developers can create even more amazing, powerful, fun and useful applications. Everyone wins – we sell more devices because we have the best apps, developers reach a wider and wider audience and customer base, and users are continually delighted by the best and broadest selection of apps on any platform.

Conclusions.

Flash was created during the PC era – for PCs and mice. Flash is a successful business for Adobe, and we can understand why they want to push it beyond PCs. But the mobile era is about low power devices, touch interfaces and open web standards – all areas where Flash falls short.

The avalanche of media outlets offering their content for Apple’s mobile devices demonstrates that Flash is no longer necessary to watch video or consume any kind of web content. And the 200,000 apps on Apple’s App Store proves that Flash isn’t necessary for tens of thousands of developers to create graphically rich applications, including games.

New open standards created in the mobile era, such as HTML5, will win on mobile devices (and PCs too). Perhaps Adobe should focus more on creating great HTML5 tools for the future, and less on criticizing Apple for leaving the past behind.

Steve Jobs
April, 2010

很簡單…三個步驟解決你的問題

1. 0. 準備，拿出一支筆
2. 1. 不要多想，用你的直覺，不要多想把你覺得合理的價格寫下來
3. 2. 如果你平常是大方的人，請走2a步驟，小氣的人走2b，如果你覺得這個案子很簡單，走2c
   1. 2a. 在你剛剛寫的價格右邊再寫一個0
   2. 2b. 在你剛剛寫的價格右邊寫上USD
   3. 2c. 在你剛剛寫的價格右邊再寫兩個0
4. 3. 完成了！這個價格就是目前市場上的合理價格

拿著合理的價格發文吧

*出來真的只是合理的價格，不誇張。

雖然Leo說他「只欣賞、不崇拜（Apple）…崇拜就表示你無法超越。」但是我還是真是崇拜Apple。雖然在設計領域還有非常多優秀的作品與大師，不過只有Apple的產品我幾乎時時刻刻在使用，充分的了解、體會Apple產品的設計。所以身為一個非科班的設計師，Apple幾乎是我設計上的導師了。

對於「設計是什麼？」這種問題，我也完全認同Steve Jobs對設計的定義。

People think it’s this veneer — that the designers are handed this box and told, ‘Make it look good!’ That’s not what we think design is. It’s not just what it looks like and feels like. Design is how it works.

– As quoted in The Guts of a New Machine (30 November 2003)

Design is how it works. 這就是我所認同，對設計的理念。

這次的iPad的發表會，Apple（= Steve Jobs?）又給我一個關於設計觀念上的啟發。

If there’s going to be a third category of device … it’s going to have to be better at these kinds of tasks than a laptop or a smartphone. Otherwise it has no reason for being.

在這段Steve Jobs在開場時為iPad定位時，關鍵字是「更好」（better）。Apple在設計iPad這個產品時，想的只有一個：怎麼把iPad做得比iPhone和MacBook更好，只有iPad比iPhone和MacBook更好，這個產品才有存在的價值，而不像NetBook只是單純比較小台，比較便宜而已。

老實說在iPad上沒有看到什麼創新的點子。硬體是大家所期待的，尺寸和其他硬體廠商的平板一樣，連OS也是iPhone OS。但是因為Apple很清楚的把握了「better」這個原則，所以才成功的設計出iPad。我也是在看到iPad用iPhone OS才醒悟OS X根本不適合用在iPad。原本設計給滑鼠點的OS如果直接移到iPad上給手指點，會是多可怕的使用體驗？

所以，設計是不斷的思考怎麼讓你的產品更好，不管是硬體、軟體、使用體驗、視覺…是關於好，更好。

Design is how it works better. 這就是我現在對設計的想法吧。

如果要再加上「設計不是什麼」的話呢？

Creativity is not design. Creativity has nothing to do with design. Creativity is bound by no laws, rules, or strictures …which is perhaps why it’s so intoxicating (sometimes to the point of delusion). Design, on the other hand, is based entirely on math, psychology, human perception, and a host of rigid rules and laws that can be broken by only a highly skilled few.

-Creativity is Not Design

Design is not creativity, design is how it works better.

想一想，我認識的設計師朋友很少談創意，反而是行銷企劃比較喜歡談呢。

蘋果的「行動裝置」價格表，在有iPad之前。

蘋果的「行動裝置」價格表，在有iPad之後。

*這張圖沒有包含iPhone，因為Apple官網iPhone的價格是綁約價，而MacBook Air價格和MacBook Pro是重疊的。

• 類別：活動網站
• 站名：揪團GO商圈
• 網址：http://www.gotpc.com.tw/

*國民黨政府的官員真是沒有言論自由的觀念，所以我把某一句批評的話display:none了。

在視覺設計方面，主要是要營造一個古早味的感覺，以及我們家企劃所說的「有故事的感覺」。雖然感覺有點老梗了…只要是傳統食品幾乎都是想塑造成有歷史有故事的感覺，不過就是這樣決定了XD。

附帶一提，在網站製作過程中我也吃到不少他們家的肉乾，真的是相當的好吃沒話說！真的推薦你訂一些回去吃喔。

• 類別：店家官網
• 站名：金龍肉乾官方網站
• 網址：http://www.kinglong.com.tw/

首頁

商品介紹

聯絡表單

由於這是一個比較大的案子，所以視覺設計有些部分還有給公司的美術調整過。但是我這邊要特別講一下，雖然比較樸素，不過我還是比較喜歡我自己設計的選單的。

視覺設計上比較沒有什麼特別之處，基本上就是配合美術畫的Logo的色調來做設計。對我來說比較特別之處在於這個網站是我第一個正式的PHP網站作品。雖然其實也沒寫到什麼程式，不過光是有template就方便很多啦。

• 類別：活動網站
• 站名：產業3G, 台北縣, 台北縣產業輔導成果發表暨展售會
• 網址：http://www.tpcshowtime.com.tw/

因為書

在寫這篇評論之前我也想了蠻久的，畢竟網站存在和誕生的數量實在太多了，為何要為一個我可能不會再去第二次的網站花費時間寫評論。特別是我對這個網站也不太欣賞，不會有太多好話的情況之下。不過這個網站的主題實在讓我很想講些什麼。

為什麼Popo原創的主題這麼有影響呢？因為這是一個關於「書」的平台。而我自認也算是一個愛書人，雖然我買的書幾乎都是理論性的翻譯書，和一般愛書人都是以文學閱讀為主不大一樣，但是我仍這麼自認的。另外我身為一個網頁設計師，在關於網路／網站／網頁的討論中，很多都是和書籍／雜誌／報紙作為對照討論的，所以我對關於書的產業的議題也相當關心。

網頁設計

但是了解到Popo原創的主題是後來的事情了。我在初次看到這個網站時，根本看不出來這個網站和「書」有任何的關係。首頁上也沒有任何的說明，一打開就是一個很多「標題」與「圖片」而沒有任何「內容」或是「說明」的首頁。版面設計的配色和排版讓我以為這是又是一個部落格平台。

是不是很像。

為了證明設計的力量，下面是我收集的網頁設計之一。這個網頁的語文甚至不是英文，我完全看不懂文字的內容，可是卻很清楚的讓人知道這個網站的功能是用Email幫助你行銷。

事實上首頁設計上還犯了一個很嚴重的錯誤，就是「把網站的內容做的像廣告一樣」。經研究顯示，網路的使用者已經越來越會自動忽略掉網頁上的廣告，包含「長得像廣告」的內容了。目前看來那些長得像廣告的位置都是推銷站內的「書」，除非這些欄位以後真的要拿來當廣告用，否則最好改變這些設計。

閱讀界面

再來是「閱讀」的部份。既然主打線上閱讀，那閱讀的界面就非常重要。目前我也沒有看到有「購買書籍」的選項，也就是你喜歡某本書的話可以購買紙本版本的機制，所以這是一個純粹線上閱讀的平台。但是Popo原創的閱讀界面實在是糟糕到了極點，正如老貓所說，是一個除了防拷貝什麼都不考慮的界面。

這個閱讀界面的缺點實在太多了，隨便舉幾個：

1. 不能用滑鼠滾輪，捲軸的寬度又小很難按，又只能一行一行捲動不能直接換一頁。
2. 那個底紋是怎麼回事？有多干擾閱讀就不用我說了吧？
3. 字大的時候，一行的字數太少了，和閱讀紙本書籍的感受差太多了。
4. 字的行距呢？城邦集團裡的編輯要不要來說一下這樣緊貼的行距對嗎？

老實說，網頁（html/css）就是設計來線上閱讀的，我還沒有看過任何閱讀界面比網頁更流暢的，這主要歸功於彈性的字體大小和無限延伸向下延伸的長度。如果閱讀過PDF那樣列印用的檔案就知道紙本的以「頁」為單位的格式搬到銀幕上閱讀性就會變得很差。當然也有閱讀性設計得相當差的網頁，但是設計得好的網頁是非常好閱讀的，像是老貓的網站：

這個網站更棒，雖然只有網頁一層平面（相對於一本書有很多頁），卻非常有「書」的感覺。

結語

如果要給建議的話，我認為出版業（包括任何相對於網路的傳統產業）在面對免費的線上內容「競爭」的時候，應該更專注於設計出符合使用者需求的服務，而不是只會限制而不事生產。在面對新興媒體時，不要意圖在新媒體上複製舊媒體，不斷複製麥克魯漢老早就發現的模式，否則只會做出像Popo網這樣差勁的東西。

關於以上的建議，我覺得蘋果（電腦，和日報都是）做得很棒，真的。

好像扯遠了，今天主要是要分享一下我的農場的照片的。我玩的農場不是國內比較多人玩的開心農場，而是FarmVille。FarmVille最大的特點就是佈置很自由，而且45度的視角讓你很容易看到農場全貌，佈置好後非常好看。所以有非常多的創意佈置照片非常有趣，像是用彩色稻草堆排成超級瑪莉的…。

而我的照片主題是「休閒農場」，經過精心設計和多次打掉重建後，終於打造出這個非常可愛的休閒農場。賣點是那四個粉紅色的可愛小木屋。有餐桌，烤肉架，每一個木屋還分配一塊美麗的花田，可以讓你在週末時來渡假。

因為實在是重來太多次了，我也了解到景觀設計實在不容易呀。很多朋友玩這個遊戲只是把空地用田蓋滿賺錢而已，我覺得非常可惜，大家也都一起來佈置一下田地吧！

由於在上星期六時，蘋果店都告訴我下星期一會到，所以星期一下班後，我馬上就到離公司比較近的蘋果店問問看。結果跑了三家都沒有，這時其實還蠻失望的，不過還在設想的可能範圍內。但是當看到推友都開始發一些10.6心得時，還是覺得非常羨慕。

星期二的時候，我特地提早了一點下班，因為正常來說今天應該都要到貨了。當我問的第一家跟我說沒貨的時候，我還呆了一下，還好在走一段路到第二家時，就有貨了。我就很高興的買了，當我聽到店員問我有沒有預定時，我還擔心是不是要預定才有呢。說誇張一點，我回程時的心情，好像用飛的一樣。

沒想到當我開始安裝後，才是天堂掉到地獄的開始。我的小黑麥在安裝到第二十分鐘時，就重開機，把光碟吐出來了。我本來還以為升級這麼迅速呢，當然…沒有升級成功。連續試兩次都這樣。難道我遇到傳說中的壞掉光碟嗎？

於是隔天，星期三，我就到蘋果店去換光碟了，店家沒有問太多，就拿了另一片換給我。我拆開來檢查一下光碟序號，跟我原本那片一樣，也就是跟網路上有文章指出壓壞的光碟的序號一樣。我想再換一片，不過店家希望我先裝看看，不成功再去換。於是我只好回家再裝裝看，果然，又失敗了。唉。

星期四，於是，我又來到蘋果店了。這次我帶著我的小黑麥去，想在店裡裝到好再走人了。店家又拆了一片給我，這次序號不一樣了，於是我就請店家在店裡幫我安裝，我心裡是預計會安裝成功的，所以我就很愉快的在旁邊玩iPod touch的遊戲等待。沒想到二十分鐘後，我的小黑麥又…重開機退出光碟了……。這時我不知道要說什麼了，店家認為說可能光碟機有問題，不能在換光碟了，他們請我明天再帶來，用硬碟幫我升級。

於是今天，星期五，我再跑了一趟，這次終於讓店家用外接硬碟幫我升級成10.6了。經過五天終於升級成功…大概就是「終於」的感覺吧…真是一場折磨啊…。

某一天，我看了nettus+的CodeIgniter From Scratch系列教學影片，剛好聽到公司同事在抱怨定便當很麻煩，突然就想到影片的教學，覺得有CodeIgniter好像就寫得出來了，於是就嘗試看看，網站就這樣出來了。

除了定便當，我後來還增加了對帳的功能。只要點今日便當的清單上的價錢，就會打勾表示這個人有付便當錢了，我對於這個UI設計還蠻得意的XD

附帶一提，因為自己人使用的，終於可以用一些CSS3效果了，爽。連結過去的網站是副本，不是我公司在用的，可以試訂玩玩看。

• 類別：訂單系統
• 站名：就是愛便當
• 網址：http://lunch.minipai.idv.tw/

網站以黑白照片為設計原形，以「當代」為主題，使用當下最先進的網站排版方式，在簡潔的設計風格上給使用者最佳的瀏覽體驗。這個網站設計也是我個人風格的典型。

• 類別：藝術
• 站名：1839當代藝廊
• 網址：http://www.1839cg.com

展覽資訊

網站首頁

其實這算是眾所周知的事情，不過最近接連看到網頁相關訊息，所以突然覺得很想寫XD。

首先是幾天前@i-design推：「設計師與字型的關係好比女人之於衣服。」我的反應是「網頁設計師不就裸體…」。是啊，網頁設計師不能使用字型，就好像沒衣服可穿一樣淒慘。後來@i-design又回：「網頁設計師設計Logo時總嫌少個字型與平日收集字型的習慣，相當於女人與衣服之間的關係 XD」。以我來說，因為要設計Logo的狀況非常少，多數情況客戶都已經有Logo了，所以更沒有收集字型的習慣了，所以有需要設計Logo時，更會嫌少了…。

接下來是，我看到又有一個新的網路字型解決方案，Type Select。我們已經有SIFR, FLIR, Typeface.js, Cufon…老實說我已經搞不清楚他們之間的差異，也沒有好好研究過。因為不管哪一種方案，運作基礎都是西方字型不到100k的大小，才能讓使用者下載然後顯示。但是中文字型太大了，是以10mb以上來計算。當然也有人實驗只載入部分字集，像是這篇Load Cufón font dynamically，不過看來還只在實驗階段…。

所以，前幾天我就看到一個令我為之嘆息的作品。

TinTint點點印，網頁的設計風格，我非常喜歡。顏色非常柔和優雅，要傳達的資訊（產品介紹）也非常清晰明瞭，甚至html碼也不差，沒有討厭的table layout。但是最可惜之處，就是主要內容為了美觀，用了大量的文字圖片，而沒有文字啊…。如果這是英文網頁，只要字型指定Helvetica就可以解決了，不必用那麼多圖片呢。

亂沒章法的講這麼多，總歸一句就是，「我不想一直做圖片取代啊！」