Comments on: How Not to Impress Me As A Potential Customer

By: Kestrel

Kestrel — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 18:19:58 +0000

At least There are some public waves available that go into it a bit, but think of Wave as a collaboration tool. Gina Trapani has a lot of online info available at smarterware.org.

By: Dragoncroft

Dragoncroft — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 18:07:23 +0000

I received an invite to Google Wave. Logged in, looked around and wondered what the heck one does with it! I suppose I should watch the 10 minute video they provided, huh?

By: Kestrel

Kestrel — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:16:50 +0000

Done, sir! It may take a few days for the invite to actually go out: Google claims they have lots of envelopes to lick. :p

By: Kestrel

Kestrel — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:15:32 +0000

You know…that’s a very interesting idea. I’ve tried WriteRoom (for the Mac), which basically mimics an old-style monochrome CRT for writing, but recently downloaded a beta of Ommwriter, which has some Zen elements. I know when I’m writing a blog article, I’m always distracted–and slowed–by typos that I immediately correct. It isn’t like they’re going to go anywhere, or the red underline will time out.

I think that’s a good strategy for almost everyone: When composing, just write!, and fix everything later.

By: Kestrel

Kestrel — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:01:20 +0000

I wasn’t too keen on the way the links were applied, either, but I know I’ve been guilty of that on occasion. You raise a good point, but not one I’d normally address–at least, not in the context of the current article.

But that does raise an interesting thought: Should we be critical of (to the point of calling out folks) poor online design in matters like that? I think to some extent, yes: A link that extends for a line and a half is clearly “too long” for most sensibilities. And I have a lot of difficulty when I’m trying to link consecutively–will people see that as three separate links, or just one?

You’re making my brain ‘splode, Maz!

By: Kestrel

Kestrel — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 16:50:04 +0000

In fact, the email is very legit, from a website/blog to which I subscribe. But yeah…I was rather dismayed as I continued to read through it to find as many egregious errors as I did.

I can understand the occasional error; they crop up here as well (although I do fix them as I see them). And as a blogger myself, I know we sometimes hit that Publish button before we’ve done all the proofing we might do on a different kind of document. But this email went a bit beyond the pale.

By: Doodlebug

Doodlebug — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 13:18:39 +0000

Heya… Kestrel… I would… love… a… Google Wave invite.

I promise not to let my love of the ellipse eclipse our conversations.

michaeltlh@gmail.com
Doodlebug´s latest blog post is Happy Thanksgiving

By: Iris

Iris — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 02:37:24 +0000

*is critted by a wall of grammar and spelling*

Oh, wow. They could definitely use a Word spell- and grammar checker, and some common English lessons. Actually, scratch that – I think this is done by spell and grammar checkers.

I have recently noticed that, due to Word’s habit of correcting especially my spelling, I have grown lazier, and at times am not sure how something is spelled, but think “Ah well, let me try, I am sure Word will suggest something.” Doh! This is bad in my book – I want to be able to spell correctly without a spellcheck, thank you very much. As such, I have decided to switch to a writing software with no spellcheck (and fewer distracting bells and whistles too).

I think unfortunately as software grows smarter, we grow more reliant on it, and gradually more stupid *sadface*. And then, one day, we decide to write a promotional email without all our favourite smart tools, and we make a bit of fools of ourselves.
Iris´s latest blog post is NaNoWriMo won!

By: Mazil

Mazil — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 01:57:17 +0000

That could definitely have used a run through the ole Word grammar check! It’s a pity grammar checkers aren’t as prevalent as spell checkers.

My web-usability eye is cringing at the text in those links, they are a bit too long and unspecific.

By: Tzia

Tzia — Tue, 01 Dec 2009 23:56:09 +0000

Kes? I hate to say it, but as soon as I read through this, my first question was : Is this a scammer attempting a very bad job at phishing? And considering I’d rate myself as about as computer savy as a brick… that doesn’t look good for the developer of the e-mail if, in fact, this is a valid e-mail from a trusted source. However, if this was not a valid e-mail, it would be something to bounce back to the original company.

As it appears to be valid though… yeesh, they need to proof read before hitting send. Or have somebody else read the copy before doing a mass e-mail. I would have opened this, glanced at it, and then probably bounced it as a phisher back to the company that sent it. For me, if its not a personal e-mail, you’d better have 99% of your ducks in a row before hitting send. Otherwise, it just makes semi-computer literate people leery of the e-mail advertizing a product.
Tzia´s latest blog post is Sorry Guys