Tuesday, May 25, 2010

Interactive Pad, all-in-one controller web


When sitting infront desktop or laptop for a long time everyday might see tiresome and don't be excited and often, we might have no fun. Which in fact the device that use in linking up it might see not excitedly is like Wii or Xbox, because, it has only mouse for click and click but, concept designing this device might make us enjoys certainly

Interactive Pad is concept designing device for all-in-one controller that can use control Facebook, Youtube, iTunes and webcam get easily. Music, video, camera and games can be configured and downloaded via the easy hotkeys. Basically for those who are into the web world just for entertainment purposes. Sit down, relax and let the fun-times begin.

Designer: Marcial Ahsayane




If you liked this product design, you would also be interested in:
www.yankodesign.com

Monday, May 24, 2010

Giveaway! "Black Blade Blues" by J. A. Pitts

Thanks to Tor Books, I have a copy of "Black Blade Blues" to offer for giveaway featured on my giveaway page. Be sure to CHECK IT OUT.

Peugeot Capsul, Hydrogen Engines Vehicle


An entry at Peugeot design competition, the "Capsul" is a public vehicle for personal use. Powered by two small hydrogen engines located in the wheels, the Peugeot Capsul provides clean and safe commutation in urban environments. Users can hire the vehicle for personal use to roam in and around the city. Made in recycled or recyclable parts, including glass, aluminum and green plastic, the sustainable vehicle comes integrated with solar nanotubes to harness solar energy as an additional power source. The two-seater smartly personalizes the public transportation to provide eco-friendly commutation on city roads.

Designer: David Portela




If you liked this vehicle, you would also be interested in:
www.thedesignblog.org

Sunday, May 23, 2010

Are Reviewer-Bloggers Spoiled Brats?

Ah the blissful autonomy of blogging. It's the best isn't it? I've enjoyed owning my little corner of the blogoshpere and have had very little to complain about. The blog went up on a whim when, as a stay-at-home mom of seven years, I was looking for some way to connect to the outside world. Not being the type to do a slice-of-life or mommy blog, I tried to think of something I enjoyed doing and started writing about that. Three years later, I'm still here.

The blog has chugged along. Blossoming a little, though still modest by most standards. A day when I get more than a few comments on a post is a good one. I figure it's a give-and-take kind of thing. The results I get are in direct proportion to the time and effort I'm able to put out. I try to stick to a theme, and mostly succeed. Commentary and reviews are my shtick and though the word "news" is on my header, well, that requires the ability to keep up on current events to an extent that escapes me most of the time. But once the name appeared on the back of a book in a review, my ego wouldn't let me change it.

That pesky ego. It gets in the way sometimes doesn't it?

Once my blog became somewhat established I found myself in a strange place. I'm not a big blog, but I've been around long enough to get on quite a few mailing lists. I get emails and inquiries on daily basis asking me, me, if I'd like to read a book and give my thoughts on it. Well, don't I feel like a big shot? And after awhile I got used to giving my opinion on books and movies-- and whatever else I decided to comment on. Which is fun. I can't lie. But I guess I wanted something more because I reached out to a local publication that was starting up and looking for reviewers. Well hey, I do that. Why don't I sign up?

You see, it was my vanity rearing it's head again. I use my screen name on my blog. But I could use my real name in print. Sweeeet. I haven't seen my name in print in almost fifteen years. I used to write for a local paper doing reviews and features-- fun stuff but kind of rinky-dink. Then I was lucky enough to get a job in television doing interviews and occasionally writing small on-air segments (I even worked in Hollywood!). But the days of feeling like a big-shot had passed and having my name in print again was a minor thrill. Too bad that didn't last long.

I've mentioned before that I have been doing reviews for one of those local book reviews that are typically distributed at your local library. Many of you may know the one I'm talking about-- I recognize more than a few of the names that have been appearing next to mine. But I also hear that bloggers are a particularly finicky breed of reviewers.

Yesterday was an illuminating day for me. It was the monthly deadline for the publication and I had a few reviews to upload. I'm one of those people who tend to be out-of-site, out-of-mind when it comes to my work-- mostly. I get the in-print publication sent to me and I tend to throw it on the shelf without looking at it. I used to check it out more often. But once I saw my reviews in print without being mucked-up, I took it for granted that once I submitted something, it would retain its integrity. And that was the case for over a year. Then, they switched editors.

For some reason I did scan a review of mine a couple of months ago and noticed some strange tweaks had been done to my work. Minor stuff really. In fact, it kind of seemed as if the editor was moving periods around or adding semi-colons just so they could assure themselves that they were doing their job. Once she added the word "besides" to a review for no apparent reason--which stumped me a little. Generally harmless, but it made me uncomfortable.

I'm the first to admit, I could benefit from having an editor. Blogging is a solitary thing. I'm lucky enough to have several contributors, many of whom still actually post content for me! I'm so grateful that I take a hands-off approach. Besides, if I'm not signing a paycheck, I don't feel I have the right to have an in-your-face attitude when it comes people who are taking time out of their day to write something for my little blog. I'm also lucky enough to have contributors who write their own content on a regular basis-- so they know how to string a sentence together. But we're just people posting on a blog. We make mistakes, overlook misspelling and typos. I fret over run-on sentences and chop sentences into fragments in an effort to streamline content. But that's the way it is when you're on your own and trying to post on a regular basis (I used to shoot for every day, now I'm happy if I put something up five days a week). I know that every single blogger reading this can relate. It's tough thinking of something to write every day and if you don't have time to re-work your writing, that sometimes means you don't get it quite the way you want. I know when I've nailed a post-- you know the feeling when you're able to transfer your feelings to the page. And I know when I can't put my thoughts into writing.

Which is why in-print reviewing was strangely important to me. I had the time, if not the space (200 words) to make sure the words were crafted exactly the way I wanted them to be. It meant something. So having someone cavalierly change my words is not something I can live with. It only took one word, one for me to realize that maybe blogging has spoiled me for other things.

But then again, the editor who felt the need to insert random punctuation into my reviews might just be an idiot. I'll let you be the judge.

So I'm uploading one review and notice another that I had posted last month-- "Storm Prey" by John Sandford. You may know the title, I have a giveaway up for it right now. It's not the genre I usually feature here, but I have a weakness for detective novels. Anyway, I scan the review and notice that the editor decided to add two little words to the second paragraph. Nothing really, but when you're dealing with something that's 200 words or less, every word counts. Apparently, the editor didn't like the way I suggested that Sandford will have readers coming back "time and again" and decided to say that the book would have readers "engaged and enchanted."

Uh. What?

Did I read that right? "Enchanted?" Wait, wait, wait. Rewind. Let me read that again. Yep, she really added the word "enchanted." Did she not read the review? Did she not notice that it was a book that included murder as part of the plot? "Enchanted?" Who the heck describes a detective novel as "enchanting?" You'll be completely enchanted by this book featuring kidnapping and murder! Blech.

Okay, okay. Maybe I'm over reacting.

But I still fume. "Enchanted." I can't stand it. My name is now inexorably linked to that darned review and it bugs me. My feelings are totally out of proportion, but I would never use that word in this context. I'm embarrassed to have my name on that review.

So I decide in that moment I need to go back to just being a blogger. I am the master of my online domain and no one can put words in my mouth. Yeah. I like it that way. So I email the owner of the review and let them know why I'm leaving. No big deal, though I feel like I'm being a bit of a spoiled artiste with a petty objection. But it's my name. It might not mean much to them. But it means something to me.

I get an email back asking to see the text of the original review-- which is responsible of them. And, surprisingly, I get some vindication in that they agree the word substitution was inappropriate and changed the tone of the review.

But they still didn't take my decision to leave the relationship with good grace. After telling me that I was right they went on to tell me that they had a particularly hard time hanging on to blogger-reviewers. That we are particularly resistant to being edited.

Come again? I'm right....but I'm a pain in the neck for pointing that out?

Apparently we're just too in-de-pen-dent for our own good and if we want to write for print publications, we need to suck it up a little. I wrote them back--politely of course-- saying that I'm familiar with the process, having working in print before. But also accepted that my temperament as a blogger might make it a poor fit for me going forward; and I left it at that.

I suppose I should thank them for making it so easy to leave. Then again... I'm not dwelling on this as much as it seems. It's a minor thing. But, given that this blog is mostly frequented by other bloggers, I thought it would be an interesting anecdote to pass on. I have no doubt that most people reading this are going to be able to relate to my feelings. Many of us want to do more than we're currently doing-- unless you're John Scalzi maybe (I couldn't resist throwing that in). A lot of us want to be read beyond the blog and I doubt most of us would mind reasonable editing--especially if it enhances our work. But no one wants to feel like some second-rate hack is being given carte blanche to make you look like a fool.

These are my words dammit. They matter to me.

I don't think I'm being spoiled for hanging on to that. Do you?

Post Script:

From the comments on this post, it seems I may have given the impression that it only took one minor incident for me to throw up my hands and say "I quit!" Well, it wasn't quite that bad. I have been doing the reviews for about a year and a half, without pay and I supply most of the books I review (which I personally get from the publisher). I thought that was a pretty good deal for publication. I was very low-maintenance. Never turned in my reviews late, always kept them within the word limit and generally tried to do a good job. I never had any communication from the publisher/editor about my reviews that indicated my work was sloppy. The original editing that had been done felt very unobtrusive and I didn't mind it at all. It's only been in the last three or four months that I've become concerned because I felt the editing took away from the quality of the work I was turning in. It also seemed that, overall, the quality of the publication was sliding. The reviews have become a lot more casual in tone (with the authors now being allowed to use the "I feel" format--something I never did for this job).

Long story short-- there wasn't an upside to me anymore. No pay, no books that I couldn't get on my own, and editing that made me uncomfortable with the quality of work my name was being attached to. I feel good about ending the relationship. I can now spend more quality time developing this blog and looking for other side-projects that will do more for me in the long run.

~SQT

Saturday, May 22, 2010

Book Review: "Blood Oath" by Christopher Farnsworth

It was only a matter of time, given the current vampire craze, that someone attempted to fuse political intrigue with everyone's favorite blood-suckers. Unfortunately Blood Oath by Christopher Farnsworth seems to be made up of clichés rather than anything of substance.

Nathanial Cade is a vampire who serves at the leisure of the President of the United States. Agreeing to be bound by a blood oath cast by a voodoo priestess, Cade has served since the presidency of Andrew Jackson and has protected every president since that time. Cade lives surrounded by relics of supernatural threats he has defeated but remains haunted by the real-life Dr. Frankenstein, known as Johann Konrad, who still lives and continues to perform experiments in hopes of creating the living dead.

Zach Barrows is a kind of political golden-boy. At least he was until he was caught in a compromising position with the President's daughter. He's been hand-picked by the President to replace Cade's current handler who is dying of cancer and soon realizes that there's a big, supernatural world that he never knew existed. And before Zach even has a chance to settle into his new position, he and Cade are called to a crime scene that involves a lot of severed body parts-- indicating that Konrad might be further along in his efforts to create a zombie super soldier than Cade realized.

"Blood Oath" is one of those books that are basically fun but really, really shallow. Farnsworth is a scriptwriter and it shows in the basic lack of character development and credibility. Just by reading the back cover of the book you know there's a good chance the story can go from zero to absurd in no time flat if it isn't written with a certain finesse, and I'm afraid it isn't.

What bothers me the most about "Blood Oath" are the clichés. You can literally check them off on your fingers: the pairing of the experienced, cynical partner and the smart-mouthed protege-- check; ambivalent hero-- check; psychotic, CIA black-op villains--check; long-standing grudge-match with evil nemesis-- check; gratuitous sex scene--check; explosions and gun fights--check; kidnap and torture of newbie partner-- check... I could go on like this for awhile. I mean, the whole book is like this.

But you know what? I take it back. There is something that bothers me more than the clichés.

Have you ever had one of those moments when you wanted to chuck a book across the room because a scene was too ridiculous? "Blood Oath" has a few of those. The one that really stands out is a scene in which one set of villains (in this case they are Muslim extremists) are carrying a severed head, intended to be part of the resurrected super-soldiers our other evil-villain has created, through the airport. When stopped by security they claim they are using the head for a "brain transplant" and are let through. Do I even have to explain why this scene is wrong on so many levels? And believe me, there is a lot of story construction here of this caliber.

Additionally the characters are not credible at all, with the villains being the worst. As I mentioned before one group of bad-guys happens to be a group of CIA black-ops agents. These people are recruited specifically because they lack anything resembling morals and are prone to committing all kinds of murder and mayhem. And I couldn't help wonder what made Farnsworth decide that if the CIA were to put together a group of agents with the license to operate outside the law, why would they pick the most unreliable, corrupt people they could find? None of the characters have much in the way of personality, but the traits they do have seem to consist of either fleeing the scene at the first sign of danger or killing the first co-worker that becomes inconvenient.

And, unfortunately, the heroes don't fare any better. For a novel that's intended to be a new take on the vampire myth, there is nothing new here. Cade is like all the other tortured, reluctant vampires who choose not to feed on human blood. I mean, that's it. The only original take on the story are the bits inserted to show the results of the tests the government has run to see the extent of Cade's abilities. And the partnership of Cade and Burrows doesn't make a whole lot of sense. Burrows is supposed to be the best-and-brightest type. An Ivy Leaguer with a quick wit. The only problem is that there are no demonstrations of logic or smarts that make us believe that Burrows is particularly bright, and his wit consists of dialog along the lines of "Dude, your girlfriend is weird."

Normally I don't out of my way to bash a novel. But I kind of want to at least ensure that one voice out there offers an honest review of "Blood Oath." If you go to the Amazon page for this book, you'll see a slew of 4 and 5 star reviews and the only conclusion I can come to is that Farnsworth has a lot of friends willing to review the book. I can see a smattering of readers saying the book is fun, but all the claims that this is the best vampire book ever! really leaves me suspicious that the reviews are not what I would consider honest assessments.

"iTit" Optical Wireless Mouse, sexy exceed restrain oneself


This is idea more than the imagination, it might make to is first impression meets all right and it might be able to guess not difficult that, what are you think?

"iTit" is number one in mouse designing get interesting and be attractive for use extremely because, it is designing mouse at get the inspiration is from the softness and sexy form of a breast.

This optical wireless mouse design tries to follow apple’s characteristics: minimal, sexy, and user friendly. The outer layer is made of delicate rubber to provide comfort and wrist safety. iTit offers emotional pleasure, fun, minimal appearance, and well-known tactile interaction. What do you think guys?

Disremember mouse like originally that use in nowadays go to. I will begin to am in love with mouse this already, because, it sexy the exceedingly

Note: still don't be finished only, try get back see mouse at design at more than sexy at "G-Point Mouse, more than the imagination and difficult explain"

Designer: Mostafa Tohidifar and David Abbasi



If you liked this mouse, you would also be interested in:
www.yankodesign.com

Friday, May 21, 2010

Two-bike in One-car


This is idea designing modern really. Because, this is the "Plug-In" affordable youth mobility project. This simple concept that can meet in the market around the Ahmedabad area of India in about "buy-one get one-free", cause idea to take two motorcycles and attach them in the middle.

Each motorcycle is owned by its respective party, a young person with a big appetite for sports vehicles but a small pocketbook, then they attach. Once two motos attach in the middle, they become that fantastic sports car from heaven.

Two drive-by-wire bikes are owned by separate people. They wanna attach them for a longer drive or some sort of trip that’s not great for motorcycle, or hey, if they just wanna cruuuze… they attach in the center of the two.

The hood is made of D3O, which when the bikes are not attached, stows away in the bike configuration. This whole concept is aimed to take on congested cities such as Mumbai.
Designer: Ramesh Gound


If you liked this vehicle, you would also be interested in:
www.yankodesign.com