RD2 Blog: Design and Coding News

I’ve been working at RD2 since July and we started a company blog shortly thereafter (which was my boss’ idea, though I readily agreed with him). I hadn’t mentioned the company blog here yet, only because I didn’t want to prematurely announce a blog with only a handful of entries. But, it’s now been going well for a few months now and I thought it would be worth sharing.

My coworkers and I have been adding entries on everything from css-based image rollovers to the pumpkin scones at Starbucks. Here’s a sample of some of the entries which I’ve written:

  • Image Replacement with CSS Based Rollovers — if you haven't dealt with non-rollover image replacement, it would probably make more sense to read the entry on regular image replacement first.

  • The Holy Grail of CSS Layout Techniques? — Through a combination of floated page sections (content, navigation and so on) and auto-float-clearing, you can selectively clear floats (and not just clear floats straight across the browser window). This is pretty nifty, well, for CSS developers :).

  • Hiding Text But Not From Screen Readers — You would think that you could just use display:none to hide text from visual browsers while letting it through for screen readers, but it doesn't quite work out that way. Fortunately, there’s a way around that.

  • Back to the Firefox Trunk Builds! — The Firefox 1.0 release was based off the Firefox “branch” while development on the rendering engine continued on the “trunk”. What does all this mean? Well, the Firefox trunk builds are good enough to use these days and they’re worth a try.

  • May as Well Set Floats to Display: inline — Floated elements are automatically set by the browser to display:block — or, that's what's supposed to happen, anyway. In IE, if you try applying a margin in the same direction of an element’s floating (such as margin-left on a float:left element), IE will double the margin! But, setting the floated element to display:inline can get around that.

So, I’ve generally written my more technically oriented entries at the RD2 blog while I’ve written much of my non-technical entries here. In some ways, it’s as if I have two blogs now, though I’m sharing the RD2 blog with the other people with whom I work ;).

I’m Still Switching From Movable Type to WordPress

I recently wrote a comment on Ask.MetaFilter, the gist of which is that I plan on switching this blog from Movable Type to WordPress (probably with the next major WordPress release, to save myself at least one upgrade cycle).

And, Anil Dash — the vice president of Six Apart, the Movable Type company — saw my comment and e-mailed me personally to ask why I had decided on that. Though I’ve e-mailed him a reply as well, I’m posting my response as an open letter here, in case other bloggers are considering the switch to WordPress.

Hi Anil,

Fancy running into you on the InterWeb. And, I believe we’ve met before at SXSW — I’ve played kickball both in ’03 and ’04 :). I also found a picture of me from the SXSW 2004 moblog.

I’m still planning on switching to WordPress and it’s primarily due to Movable Type’s new licensing. Sure, I can use 3.x for free as I limit my blog to one author and three or fewer blogs — which currently is the case — but why not switch to a publishing system without those limits, in case I want to add another author or a few extra blogs sometime later?

I think my thoughts on this are summed up well in DiveIntoMark’s essay "Freedom Zero":

“I do not have the freedom to run [Movable Type] for any purpose; I only have the limited set of freedoms that Six Apart chooses to bestow upon me, and every new version seems to bestow fewer and fewer freedoms. With Movable Type 2.6, I was allowed to run 11 sites. In 3.0, that right will cost me $535. […]”

Continuing along those lines, I can’t be sure that Movable Type 4.0 won't limit free use to one author + one blog — or even start charging for non-commercial use in general. Now, I take to heart that Six Apart is one of the most non-evil companies around and that such a scenario may be unlikely; but that’s not to say that it couldn't happen.

Anyhow, Anil, please don’t take this as anything against you personally. I’ve had a great time playing kickball every year and if you’re ever in Dallas I’d be happy to take you out for a beer (HHOS).

--
Alex Bischoff

In Good Company — Review

Full disclosure: Grace Hill Media offered bloggers a free screening pass in exchange for writing an entry about In Good Company; I participated in that offer.

I saw In Good Company last night. I’d been seeing commercials for it on TV for weeks and a few ads appeared in my TiVo as well; and, it looked pretty good from those ads. To be honest, you probably already have an opinion about this movie, one way or another. And, if you liked what you saw in the trailers, you’ll like this movie.

One fault of the trailers is that they portray this as a fish-out-of-water story, which is only partially true. In short, 26 year-old Carter Duryea (played by Topher Grace) suddenly becomes the boss of Dan Foreman (played by Dennis Quaid) as he takes on the role of head of advertising at a sports magazine. However, that scenario is only a major plot device for about the first half hour.

Past that, it gets into personal and personnel relationships. In particular, Dan’s daughter Alex (played by Scarlett Johansson) becomes romantically interested in Carter. On top of that, Carter has to adjust to his new position within the company.

Really, I knew what I was getting into when I walked in to the theater — one run through the trailer clearly defines the scope of the film. All the same, this isn’t another paint-by-numbers romantic-dramedy. You may think you know what’s going to happen, but it doesn’t always work out that way.

At one point, I was even hoping for the ever-elusive Accountants Ending. (For those unaware, the “accountants ending” is the prototypical unexpected ending for a fictional work: Two men face off at the end, about to kill one another. Then, one interjects “Do you think we should just become accountants?” to which the other replies “Well, right-o. Let’s do that.”)

I enjoyed the characters and the film as a whole; and I also found the set design notably charming. In the scenes taking place within Dan’s house, the furniture, lamps and bookshelves all seemed authentic to a man of his position in life. The sets within the office-oriented scenes were also good, though I did notice an annoying tendency to use underlighting — such as from podiums and even conference tables — that I couldn’t imagine any actual office having.

Some critics describe a movie's worth in terms of whether it’s worth seeing in the theater, as a rental, or not at all. And, as I was walking out of the theater, I was trying to ask myself that question. I was generally leaning towards “maybe a rental”, but I think I’ll qualify that. If you liked the trailer and you like Topher Grace as an actor, you can’t go wrong with seeing this in the theater — it may not be high literature, but you’ll have a good time.

I do have a few minor gripes about the movie, primary of which is that the director and/or score composer didn’t always trust his audience to “know how to feel”. For the most part, the script could have stood on its own; but, there were times where I’d notice a sappy acoustic guitar piping in as if to say “See? You’re feeling all mushy inside, right?”.

In addition to that, Johansson’s lips looked swollen throughout the flick. I've seen her in other works, notably Lost in Translation, but her lips just seemed to big for her own face here. Really, in her first scene, I thought that the make-up artist had just done a shoddy job — that he/she had not “colored within the lines” when applying Johansson’s lipstick.

Another nit was Carter’s Porsche 911 Carrera. One of the first scenes clearly establishes him buying an automatic — as he drives out of the dealership, the camera cuts to a view of his hand putting the car into “D” or such. However, a running joke throughout the movie is that he can barely drive this car. Now, setting aside the cliche that is the Can’t Drive A Manual joke, the joke isn’t even relevant with an automatic transmission. Driving such a car is just a matter of pressing one’s foot down on the skinny pedal towards the right ;).

Jelly Filled Death

Bryan is aware of my penchant for JFDs — Jelly Filled Doughnuts, perhaps my favorite doughnut variety — and he brought some in to the office today. He brought in a variety of doughnuts from Krispy Kreme, including some raspberry JFDs. Well, how could I resist?

So, as I went through my usual morning routine of checking my e-mail and upgrading my browser, I made my way through the doughnut. And, the raspberry filling was a nice change of pace from the usual “red flavor” which goes into JFDs. It did seem a bit sweet to me at the time, but that’s probably just me since I don’t consume much sugar these days.

It’s now about an hour later and I’m wishing that maybe I didn't eat a whole doughnut. Calories aside, I feel a little woozy. In fact, in pondering the sensations from my midsection, it seems to resemble a punch in the stomach. I’m sure I’ll be fine soon enough but I didn’t expect that doughnut to have such a lasting impression ;). Note to self: Doughnuts may be delicious delicacies, but perhaps more so in moderation.

PS: Bryan, I still appreciate the gesture and I consider this purely my fault ;)

Bumpy vs Smooth Klingon Heads

So, I suppose you've been wondering why TNG Klingons have bumpy heads while TOS Klingons have smooths heads? Or is that just me? Well, Sci Fi Wire is reporting that an upcoming episode of Enterprise will deal the subject. (For those unaware, Klingons in “Star Trek: The Next Generation” had alien-looking bumpy heads while the actors in “The Original Series” had no such prosthetics.)

In the episodes, the Enterprise heads back to Earth for the official launch of the Columbia NX-02, Starfleet's second warp ship, commanded by Erika Hernandez. Phlox is abducted by aliens and finds himself in the presence of Klingons who tell him the Empire is facing its gravest threat in centuries. Along the way, as Archer and company investigate and pursue, it’s revealed that one of our main characters has a secret past, which comes into play, the site reporte. […]

I did some additional investigation and discovered that the episode, Affliction is scheduled to air on February 18th. And, as I enjoy Enterprise, I’ll watch the episode when it airs. But I’ve never cared that much about this issue — I just figured that 60s television shows didn’t have those kind of makeup effects. (On the other hand, some Trekkers have completely over-analyzed the subject, to the point of hypothesizing scientific theories within the Star Trek universe which could have explained the discrepancy.)