It takes a minute to load, but it's fun. :) Try it yourself here.

As I’m never shy to point out, I’m accepting additional freelance and contract work right now. Last week I met with an account manager at a local creative staffing agency. We started talking about CSS/JavaScript based web work vs Flash/ActionScript web work. I noted a counter-intuitive pay differential between design tools: design and development in Flash seems to pay 50% more than my preferred method, which is design and development in CSS/JavaScript. This is counter-intuitive for a few reasons reasons: 1) Flash is much easier to build rich user-interfaces with than JavaScript. It’s not hard with JavaScript, it’s just harder than using Flash. Lower barriers to entry (via easier to use technology) should drive prices down, not up. 2) As most people are aware, the content in a Flash based website is invisible to Google. It can’t be indexed. If you want a Flash based website, that’s fine. You better have a strong campaign in place to promote it virally or through… display ads? Either way, your traffic won’t be coming through organic search results on Google. Maybe this works for Nike - they already have an established brand and online destination. For pretty much everyone else, this should be a deal killer. 3) It won’t display on an iPhone. People with iPhones are geeky and have enough money to buy an iPhone. If you have something to sell, you want these people to see your website.
 
So why are there so many Flash sites out there? People love animation in the browser. Flash did it first. It’s as if Flash has become the Kleenex of web animation: People say “Kleenex” when they mean “facial tissue” and “Flash” when they mean “web animation”. But what many haven’t realized is that the animations needed for most websites are available in JavaScript libraries like YUI or jQuery. That replaces the need for 98% of what Flash does. Why do designers still use Flash? It’s more user-friendly than the JavaScript libraries. But a website built with animation handled by jQuery instead of Flash (all other things being equal) is a superior product if for no other reason than its ability to be indexed by Google and show up in an iPhone. The superior (and more technically complex) product should command a higher value.
 
Again, I have nothing against Flash and believe there are appropriate uses. The athletic clothing brand Champion demonstrates a good use of Flash on a website where you can design a hooded sweatshirt (www.hoodieremix.com). The rich motion graphics are an integral part of this branded experience. This will get traffic without Google’s help because: a) it’s a microsite under the umbrella of an established brand, b) this application’s uniqueness has a strong word of mouth value, c) viral “share this” features are built into the application.
 
Going back to my friend at the staffing agency, Flash design pays more because advertising and marketing agencies love (LOVE!) Flash. Everyone at these agencies learned it years ago. They’re on tight deadlines and don’t have time to learn something new. Their clients (Nike, Toyota, even Microsoft) are satisfied with what they deliver. These agencies have lots of money to play with. Thus, Flash pays well.
 
Flash is interesting. I wouldn’t recommend it for a company’s website, but a graphics rich microsite? Sure. Especially if it means I had the opportunity to work with a major brand like Nike, Burton, or Toyota. I’m going to crank out some more Flash projects in the next few weeks. I’ll probably write about the experience - what I did and how I’m feeling about it. :0)

I was just talking with Adina a couple of weeks ago about something like this. We were driving through Vancouver BC and discussing how nice it would be if there were high speed trains connecting Portland OR to Seattle WA to Vancouver BC. This would do incredible things for our northwest industries and quality of life. I'm very excited!

I was at a golf course today (really) and purchased a coffee. I expected it to be sub-par, even plain bad. But it was awful, so weak it could pass for microwaved swamp water. I took a couple of sips and asked myself, "Can I just tough it out and be happy?" No. I apologized for being snooty about the coffee and asked for a refund. The concessions girl asked me if I wanted an americano instead. Hmm... Crappy espresso? As long as it's not crappy watery espresso.
 
"Yes. But *please* make sure to only add a little bit of water. I like my coffee strong." That's actually not true. I don't like my coffee strong. I just like coffee - not murky brown water warmed to 160 degrees.
 
She started making the americano and asked, "Room for cream?" What?! Does she mean room for cream over and above the massive amount of room she's creating by pouring espresso over a very small amount of water? Not wanting to create any confusion about the miniscule amount of water to be mixed with my espresso, I said, "Yes."
 
She hands me the americano. It's a twelve ounce cup filled 9 ounces of water and two ounces of espresso. I looked into the drink and could almost see the bottom of the paper cup.
 
FAIL.
 
She looked at me like such a P.O.S. as she refunded my money. Sorry lady. Apparently I'm the jerk because you didn't listen to a single thing I said. No more coffee at the golf course. This is the power of (not) listening.

Before I had any idea what was happening, TV on the Radio had pushed aside all of my other music and turned into a mild compulsion. As with most bands that I end up loving, I wasn't into them at first. I guess that process isn't surprising. Those things which I would immediately be into are things would be somewhat familiar and really not mix things up. Those things which really mix things up (and make me remember how enjoyable music can be) are not going to grab me instantly.
 

I have no children, but have heard people with children claim that they don't have a favorite child. This always seemed like a lie. Children scream and pee and break stuff a lot. Clearly, the child with the least amount of screaming and peeing and breaking stuff wins. "No, no," these parents would tell me. "You'll understand later."

I do (finally) understand.

Like so many of my people, I am an NPR addict. Trying to choose a favorite NPR show, I've determined, is impossible. This is what picking favorite children MUST be like. I love them all so much... But in this realization, I also realized that those parents withheld a secret: sometimes, for a brief moment in time, it's possible to love one child more than the other. Whether it's an episode of This American Life with a new monologue by David Sedaris, or a wickedly (and hilariously) neurotic hour of Wiretap, favorites exist in these wonderful and temporary moments.

And with that, I want to share a few minutes from yesterday's On the Media. It tells you things you (hopefully) already know, but does so in a way that's concise and entertaining. It will likely leave you feeling both assaulted and empowered. You may throw up some middle fingers and yell, "Thank YOU!" I recommend a listen.

(For those who don't know, On the Media is a show that analyzes media coverage and the story behind the news you watched on TV or read in the NY Times.)

(If you're reading this via RSS, you have to click through for the embedded media. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, just press "play" below.)

Waiting in a line of cars at Stevens Pass listening to music. Stuck. Moving ten feet every twenty minutes.

We finally spot a roadblock. One man standing in blowing wind and rain, sending cars down the ridge line one at a time. We wait. And wait.

We reach the roadblock and open our windows. The wind blows rain into the car. "Leave space between you and the car in front of you. Don't go faster than forty. If you see snow movin' - stop! And for god's sake, keep your windows rolled up!" he yelled through blowing rain and a bushy mustache. We nodded in acknowledgment of these surreal instructions and set off into the darkness.

Then the snow began to move; an amusing, non threatening, spray from the ridge above the empty road. We stopped the car. The bottleneck burst and the ridge vomited snow in a violent heaving fit. It lasted for at least a minute. It felt like an hour. When the snow stopped, its tallest point was thirty or forty feet high. It covered all four lanes of traffic.

We breathed a sigh of relief. Then, as if trapped in a cliche B movie scene, we looked toward the cliff towering threateningly above us. We checked the windows to ensure that they were all, in fact, rolled up.

is named Damon Weaver. According to Damon, Joe Biden is already his "homeboy". And he wants to be homeboys with Barack Obama as well.

Man, what was I doing in fifth grade? Probably watching "Hey Dude" with my sister.

I was walking down the street last night listening to music when a call came in. I whipped out my iphone and took the call. After hanging up, I thought about how pulling out my phone and accepting the call was an interruption in my otherwise pleasant walk. It wasn't the call that was the interruption. It was the physical act of pulling out my phone, taking my eyes off of the scenery, and unlocking my phone to answer.

I thought, "Gee, wouldn't it be nice if the little mic on my headphones served as a button to take calls?"

Then I tried it. It turns out that it does. Maybe this is old news to you, but this was a moment of "Apple, I could just hug you" to me. After playing around with the mic, I found out it does several other things.

1. Squeeze once to pause or play your music.
2. Squeeze twice to skip to the next track.
3. Squeeze three times to go back to the beginning of the track.

Again, I know I may be waaay behind the times on this. Regardless, I am sure that others have yet to figure this out. Are there any other cool (and somewhat obscure) things my iphone does?

I've never felt compelled to post video to YouTube. It's not for lack of ease. I know that I can post as much as I want, whenever I want, about whatever I want. What do I do? I post nothing.

What if there was only one video sharing website? And what if I could post only one video? The scarcity gives it significance. What would I post? A case for world peace? My obituary? A valuable and personal life lesson worth sharing?

But we can post as much as we like. As a result, we get tremendously entertaining content which makes the world smile but doesn't save any polar bears from global climate change. Well, okay, there are climate change videos. National Geographic has a great Climate Change 101 video with about 250 thousand views. For the sake of comparison this totally awesome but polar-bear-neglecting video below has about 15 million views. It makes me wonder how we can do better...

(Polar bears or not, watch the video. It's sweet.)