Though I’m usually glad to take most of the credit, much of my professional and personal design work is often the better for having been subject to collaboration and criticism from my co-workers.

After much teasing/coaxing/punching, my professional better half at silverorange, Daniel Burka, has finally joined the world of weblogs. His site, DeltaTangoBravo.com just went up this morning and already busting with coolness. Fans of the silverorange design aesthetic (if there is such a thing) will recognize Daniel’s signature style.

So far, he has pointed to an amazing set of Tufte-esque illustrations (beautiful) and regaled us with the sad tale of putting his new digital camera through the washer (and dryer).

Welcome to Daniel, and to those who enjoy all things smart and good, get over there and syndicate that thing.

I have some unsolicited advice from an armchair engineer to Apple.

Microsoft is planning for the eventual advent of much higher-resolution LCD panels that we currently have. Their next major operating system release will be entirely vector-based, not tied to the pixel or any specific resolution. However, Microsoft’s next release isn’t scheduled until 2006.

Apple already has a vector-based resolution independent user interface that has been maturing for several years. Apple also has control over the hardware (something Microsoft is starting to get right with their Athens PC specs).

Clearly, price is the hurdle in delivery higher resolutions LCD panels – but Apple sells a high-end product to a market that is willing to pay a premium. I think I might be persuaded to buy an Apple if it came with a 17” or 18” display with a 3200 by 1800 pixel resolution (or higher). At that point, text starts to become as readable on screen as it is on the printed page.

One issue that they would have to deal with if they did jump to a resolution like that is those elements that are inevitably pixel-based. While the primary user interface controls are scalable, some applications would surely have some pixel-based elements implemented.

The most important pixel-based element would be the web. While good CSS and web fonts would thrive in a high-res environment, our trusty GIFs, PNGs, JPEGs, and any pixel-specified fonts or CSS elements would be minuscule. On a 200dpi screen 12-pixel Times New Roman would be less than 1/16th-inch tall.

Perhaps a high-resolution aware web browser could scale the page elements up to a reasonable size. Of course, quality would suffer but if your resolution takes a large enough jump, you could double the size of web graphics and things would look at least as good as they do on our 2003 screens.

I could hack together my own setup right now. IBM is selling a 22” LCD with a native resolution of 3840×2400 ($7,500USD as of this writing). A graphics card (or several graphics cards) to power that kind of resolution would also cost a premium. Even then, I’d be stuck running operating systems that might let me scale the font size up, but a typical website (800 pixels wide) would only be about 4½” wide. I’d also have to get a much better digital camera.

Apple is in a position to pull together the hardware (LCD and graphics card) and software (OS X with Quartz + website magnification in their own Safari browser). If they could pull it off for an anywhere reasonable price (maybe $6,000 for a computer and screen), they would take a giant leap ahead of any other platform.

I’ve heard many people complain that Apple is charging too much (or that they shouldn’t be charging at all) for the “point releases” (10.2, 10.3, etc.). I completely sympathize with these complaints. The last two point-releases, 10.2 and 10.3, each costs $129 US ($179 Canadian).

However, I have to stick to the position that I’ve long since taken on software upgrades and pricing. I would love it Adobe would stop cramming crap new features into Photoshop and Illustrator. Rather, I would like them to spend a few months without adding any new features and just make everything better. Take the startup time down a few seconds, subtly refine the UI, fix bugs. I would pay.

This is what Apple has done with OS X 10.3. There are some new features, but the important improvements are subtle and all over the place. The end result is that the system just feels better. That’s worth the money for me. I wish more developers would focus on solidifying and simplifying rather adding more and more features.

My favourite part of the design process is the latter stages, even post-launch/release, when a slew of tiny improvements that seem independently insignificant add up for make the end result seem more mature and mysteriously better. For example, I would love to see the subtle changes that Matthew Haughey has suggested for the new A List Apart site implemented.

In the early stages of development of Mozilla Firebird there was a rule that each release (and there were frequent releases) had to be smaller (file size of the download) than the previous release. This forced the developers to keep simplicty and efficiency in mind and encouraged the optimization of existing features as much as adding new features.

I think where this gets lost is when the marketing department (curse them!) starts to get control over the feature list. I’m convinced that Microsoft Office changes its “skin” with each version just to look like something new and worth paying for.

My family has embraced the home computer. They use Hotmail to keep in touch with relatives. They use a scanner, despite absolutely terrible software that came with it (Canon). They use MSN Messenger to chat with friends (a lot). They use Microsoft Word to write papers, letters, and memos and print them off on an Epson printer ink-jet.

The trouble is, every few weeks, they’re Windows XP computer becomes overrun with spy-ware, viruses, and general crap. A knowledgeable friend told me that if you put a plain-old Windows XP, unprotected, directly on the Internet, it will be compromised in hours. I thought he was exaggerating. After another visit to my parent’s computer, I know that he is not.

They have pop-up windows coming up when you don’t even have a web browser running (some spy-ware app). I ran a slew of anti-virus and anti-spyware apps and discovered hundreds of unwanted apps and files.

The trouble is, I would rather dig ditches in the hot sun than do tech support. I am terrible at it. My girlfriend tells me that it uncovers an ugly and angry side of me. I have no patience. I find doing tech support more stressful than almost anything else in life. It is a massive personality/character flaw of mine.

So, I’ve come to the conclusion that my parents do need someone to help them with their computer, and that I’m not sure I can do it. So what do I do? I thought about buying them an iBook (or eMac). That would solve a lot of the spyware/virus issues. However, I’m afraid it would uncover a whole slew of new issues. They would have to learn a new OS – not matter how good it is. I would be less able to help them, as I’m less familiar with OS X than I am with Windows.

I wish I could give them a simple locked-down system with a word-processor and web-browser, and not let them (or anyone) install anything else. I could probably do this with Linux, but that would be a whole new can of worms – and I’m not really qualified.

They are willing to pay someone else to help, but I have no-where to point them. Most tech support at local computer firms is too expensive and the people can be clueless.

Surely I’m not the only reluctant-relative-system-administrator (while talking with Stephen DesRoches about this, he enthusiastically agreed). What can we do to make this easier (for me and my parents)? Help!

My plan for now is to block of Saturday afternoon and re-format their machine, put it behind a hardware router (as a firewall), and hope it doesn’t happen again.