Apple’s Skeuomorphism

   
Apple announced on Monday that Scott Forstall would be stepping down as senior VP of iOS software. Rumor says he was actually fired because he refused to sign an apology letter for the awful and problematic Maps app. A more long-standing conflict was his skeuomorphic design approach. Skeuomorphic design keeps some of the old elements to make the new look familiar and comfortable, even such elements don’t make any sense with the new materials and techniques. In the case of Apple, it would mean creating virtual applications that mimic real-world objects. It sounds nice but it’s really conservative in nature. It’s actually quite laughable that a progressive inventor like Apple would still continue to use retro-looking interfaces. Here are some examples:

Calendar’s leather top

Contacts looks like an old-school address book

Notes takes the form of a yellow legal pad and uses awful font that looks like handwriting

Wooden bookshelves and leather-bound books in iBooks

Turning pages in iBooks

Shredder in Passbook

The worse app by Apple ever: Cards

It reminds me of Karim Rashid’s comment on digital cameras: “All of a sudden our cameras have no film, why on earth do we have the same shape we had before?” The iPhone has a digital camera, but it comes with a mechanical shutter click sound. For a company who values so much the unity of hardware and software, this mismatch is rather embarrassing. Hopefully this will change when Jony Ive takes over part of Scott Forstall’s responsibilities and heads up the new human interface (HI) department, as also announced on Monday. Actually you could smell some hints in Tim Cook’s iPad mini presentation regarding the iBooks update last week. The new version contains “a really cool new reading option – continuous scrolling. If you just flip when you are reading, the words scroll by just as you would expect.” Well, that’s what an ebook is.
   

Building anatomy

   
Thanks to Sergio for bringing up the comparison of anatomical drawing and MRI scan. Traditionally in medical sciences, we rendered organs and biological systems as components of the human body. Our perception of them was based on the three-dimensional shapes and volumes (morphology) of individual parts we saw when examining cadavers. With technological developments in the 20th century, we can now actually draw “plans” and “sections” of the body with the help of X-ray, ultrasound, and MRI.

Anatomical Chart from Cyclopaedia, vol.1, 1728

The Visible Human Project, 1989-1994

MRI slices of the head

The two modes of representation remind me of OMA’s competition entry to the National Library in France. There was a negative model that showed the voids like organs in a cube. Then a series of plans sliced the cube horizontally like MRI scans.

OMA: Très Grande Bibliothèque, Paris, 1989. Model

OMA: Très Grande Bibliothèque, Paris, 1989. Selected plans

Compared to the developments in medical sciences, I feel that the two modes of representation in architecture, at least in Western traditions, went the other way around. Plans and sections have long been the standard ways to describe a building, while accurate scale model as a professional tool was only getting popular in the 20th century. Many “old-school” architects still conceive their buildings through plans and sections. OMA’s way of designing the National Library was quite a groundbreaking milestone in this regard.

Rembrandt, The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp, 1632

Mies at IIT, 1938

Now we have computer applications. The powerful 3D programs and rendering engines have completely changed our expectations of representation in the design stage. And for better or worse, they have also changed the way we design. Perhaps the future lies in the up-and-coming Revit program, which offers a bridge that brings together the technical 2D drawings and conceptual 3D thinking of architecture.
   

Pushing the limits

   
“The decision has been made. Felix Baumgartner will jump,” the Red Bull Stratos live feed commentator announced. After being delayed for a few days due to weather conditions, the Austrian skydiver finally went up about 39 kilometers above ground tonight with a helium balloon and jumped back to earth safe and sound.

This is nuts! The successful freefall has made Felix the first human being to break the sound barrier and reach a speed of 1,342.8 km per hour (Mach 1.24) without a vehicle. He later explained that traveling supersonic was “hard to describe because I didn’t feel it.” With no reference points, “you don’t know how fast you travel.”

There was no epic small-step/big-step statement. “I’m going home now” was what Felix said before he jumped out of the capsule. When asked what he was thinking before the jump, he said, “When you stand up there on top of the world, you become so humble. You do not think about breaking records any more; you do not think about gaining scientific data. The only thing that you want is to come back alive. This became the most important thing to me.”

Such highly risky act cannot be accomplished by one man. There was a support team of 300 people on the ground, including 70 scientists, engineers, and doctors who had been working for five years on the mission. Among them was Joe Kittinger, the former US Air Force test pilot who set the record for highest freefall jump in 1960. He’s the only person who knows exactly how Felix feels. Now 84, he acted as mentor and was the person who guided Felix through the mission from the NASA-style control center, instead of being bitter about himself not being the record holder any more.

Joe Kittinger said, “Records are meant to be broken.” After the skydive, Felix said at the press conference, “I want to inspire the next generation. I would love to be sitting at the same spot where Joe Kittinger is sitting here, and there’s a young guy sitting right next to me asking for advices because he wants to break my record.”

This is the inspiring spirit of humanity. We need the courage to keep pushing the limits, and at the same time the humility to encourage other people to do so. Felix was brave to step out of his comfort zone and facing uncertainty. Curiosity and dedication pushed him to explore new territories. What his success symbolizes is precisely what drives our civilization to move forward.
   

The new rebel

       
Yesterday, Microsoft unveiled their new tablet product line – Surface. It’s another attempt of Microsoft trying to be also “Microhard,” and obviously an attempt to catch up with the iPad. I can’t tell how competitive it would be. But I have to say, Microsoft did manage to surprise us with some cool new things that Apple didn’t think of.

Overall, Surface looks a bit boring just like any other PC or Google hardware. The kickstand seems redundant and so retro-looking, but the magnesium casing looks pretty sweet. It's also going for a 16:9 aspect ratio, with built-in USB connection.

What’s truly ingenious is the keyboard on the Touch Cover. You can buy a Smart Cover for your iPad, but it’s not smart enough now. Microsoft takes a step forward to include a keyboard using pressure-sensitive technology. When connected, Surface would even change the screen background color according to the color of the Touch Cover! I can’t wait to try hand-on and see how well the typing works.

Another cool thing is that the higher version runs full Windows 8 Pro (although it gets to 1.35cm thick). This means you can install any other programs built on Windows, like Office and Photoshop, not just mobile apps. It is full PC power, merging the notions of tablet and desktop.

The press event was nothing compared to the Apple ones. The demos seemed very clumsy and Steve Ballmer didn’t even smile when he introduced the products. But at the end the coolest thing happened – an amazing video featuring the awesome dubstep “SRFC in C Minor” by Keith Rivers Films. It feels fresh and exciting compared to the recent Apple ads. There is no running or hammering, but I sense a kind of the Apple “1984” ad aura. I guess when the underdog becomes mainstream, the old leader will act as the new rebel.

       

Hello, I’m a smartphone addict

       

Keep refreshing your email accounts on your phone more than you need to? Constantly checking what your friends are up to through the Facebook and Twitter apps? Feel like reloading news pages all the time even you know truly significant events don’t happen every 5 minutes? Welcome to the club of smartphone addicts!

A recent research in England found out that obsessive use of smartphones may link to higher stress. Richard Balding, a psychologist in the department of psychology at the University of Worcester, and his team recruited more than 100 participants for the study, including university students, retail workers, and public-sector employees. They were asked to complete a questionnaire and conduct psychometric stress tests. The results showed that the people who check their phone more frequently tend to be more stressed. The study also revealed that 37% of adults and 60% of teenagers described themselves as addicted to their devices. People can get very anxious and suffer from withdrawal symptoms when not receiving notifications or alerts on their phones. Some are so hooked that they even begin to experience “phantom” vibrations or bings where they mistakenly believe their phone gives an alert.

It sounds like an easy accusation. But on second thought, I’m not so convinced. There are so many possible reasons for stress. Work, relationships, organizing life, or even just conducting the test itself. The cause-effect link seems a bit hastily established. Also, could it be the other way around? Maybe an easily-stressed person checks his/her phone often because he/she tend to feel more obliged to keep on top of things? Maybe those who are already stressed out would like to have some light readings for a change or turn to their friends for some fun?

The study suggested that “people should have a break from their smartphones where possible.” But human beings are social animals. It’s only natural to have the desire to be connected. Sorry Balding, I am and I will still be a smartphone addict.
   

iRemember

   

Apple.com / Tim Cook
Apple has lost a visionary and creative genius, and the world has lost an amazing human being. Those of us who have been fortunate enough to know and work with Steve have lost a dear friend and an inspiring mentor. Steve leaves behind a company that only he could have built, and his spirit will forever be the foundation of Apple.

Apple's board
Steve's brilliance, passion and energy were the source of countless innovations that enrich and improve all of our lives. The world is immeasurably better because of Steve.

Steve Wozniak
We've lost something we won't get back... he brought a lot of life to the world.

Bob Iger
His legacy will extend far beyond the products he created or the businesses he built. It will be the millions of people he inspired, the lives he changed, and the culture he defined. Steve was such an “original,” with a thoroughly creative, imaginative mind that defined an era... With his passing the world has lost a rare original, Disney has lost a member of our family, and I have lost a great friend.

John Lasseter & Ed Catmull
Steve Jobs was an extraordinary visionary, our very dear friend and the guiding light of the Pixar family. He saw the potential of what Pixar could be before the rest of us, and beyond what anyone ever imagined. Steve took a chance on us and believed in our crazy dream of making computer animated films; the one thing he always said was to simply "make it great." He is why Pixar turned out the way we did and his strength, integrity and love of life has made us all better people. He will forever be a part of Pixar’s DNA.

Bill Gates
The world rarely sees someone who has had the profound impact Steve has had, the effects of which will be felt for many generations to come. For those of us lucky enough to get to work with him, it's been an insanely great honor. I will miss Steve immensely.

Larry Page
He was a great man with incredible achievements and amazing brilliance. He always seemed to be able to say in very few words what you actually should have been thinking before you thought it. His focus on the user experience above all else has always been an inspiration to me.

Sergey Brin
From the earliest days of Google, whenever Larry and I sought inspiration for vision and leadership, we needed to look no farther than Cupertino. Steve, your passion for excellence is felt by anyone who has ever touched an Apple product (including the macbook I am writing this on right now). And I have witnessed it in person the few times we have met.

Eric Schmidt
Steve defined a generation of style and technology that's unlikely to be matched again.

Jerry Yang
Steve was my hero growing up. He not only gave me a lot of personal advice and encouragement, he showed all of us how innovation can change lives. I will miss him dearly, as will the world.

Mark Zuckerberg
Steve, thank you for being a mentor and a friend. Thanks for showing that what you build can change the world. I will miss you.

Dick Costolo
Once in a rare while, somebody comes along who doesnt just raise the bar, they create an entirely new standard of measurement. #RIPSteveJobs

Meg Whitman
Steve Jobs was an iconic entrepreneur and businessman whose impact on technology was felt beyond Silicon Valley. He will be remembered for the innovation he brought to market and the inspiration he brought to the world.

Barack Obama
Steve was among the greatest of American innovators - brave enough to think differently, bold enough to believe he could change the world, and talented enough to do it... [H]e transformed our lives, redefined entire industries, and achieved one of the rarest feats in human history: he changed the way each of us sees the world. The world has lost a visionary. And there may be no greater tribute to Steve’s success than the fact that much of the world learned of his passing on a device he invented.

Bill Clinton
His passion for his work and his courage in fighting his cancer were an inspiration to us all.

Nancy Pelosi
Steve Jobs was a visionary who changed the way we live, an innovator whose products brought joy to millions, a risktaker who wasn't afraid to challenge the status quo, and an entrepreneur who led one of the most creative companies of our time. His sage advice was respected by policymakers on both sides of the aisle. His courageous fight against cancer brought strength to many.

Michael Broomberg
America lost a genius who will be remembered with Edison and Einstein, and whose ideas will shape the world for generations to come. Again and again over the last four decades, Steve Jobs saw the future and brought it to life long before most people could even see the horizon. And Steve's passionate belief in the power of technology to transform the way we live brought us more than smart phones and iPads: it brought knowledge and power that is reshaping the face of civilization.

Arnold Schwarzenegger
Steve lived the California Dream every day of his life and he changed the world and inspired all of us.

Steven Spielberg
Steve Jobs was the greatest inventor since Thomas Edison. He put the world at our fingertips.

George Lucas
The magic of Steve was that while others simply accepted the status quo, he saw the true potential in everything he touched and never compromised on that vision. He leaves behind an incredible family and a legacy that will continue to speak to people for years to come.

JJ Abrams
There are so few people who are undeniably, brilliantly inspiring. Steve Jobs, a man who changed the way we create, the way we communicate, the way we live, was one of those people. I already miss knowing he is out there.

John Hodgman
Everything good I have done, I have done on a Mac.

Walter Isaacson
He revolutionized six industries: personal computers, animated movies, music, phones, tablet computing and digital publishing. You might even add a seventh: retailing, which Jobs did not quite revolutionize but did reimagine... Jobs thus became the greatest business executive of our era, the one most certain to be remembered a century from now. History will place him in the pantheon right next to Thomas Edison and Henry Ford.

Lance Armstrong
His brilliant and innovative spirit will be deeply missed. Steve pioneered a new way of seeing and embracing the world and his indelible influence will be felt by generations to come... We have lost an icon and I have also lost a friend.

Norman Foster
Steve was an inspiration and a role model. He encouraged us to develop new ways of looking at design to reflect his unique ability to weave backwards and forwards between grand strategy and the minutiae of the tiniest of internal fittings. For him no detail was small in its significance and he would be simultaneously questioning the headlines of our project together whilst he delved into its fine print. He was the ultimate perfectionist and demanded of himself as he demanded of others.

Collected with my iPhone, iPad; posted from my MacBook via Safari.
   

Shall we talk?

       

It was a big letdown not to see iPhone 5 announced at the Apple event today. But Siri, a talking virtual assistant is officially active now. We've used a GPS device, and we've tried speaking to the Google search app. But they were not as interactive and "intelligent." Siri will certainly change the way humans communicate with machines. At least closer to what we imagined the future would be in the past.

HAL 9000, 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968)

"Mother," Alien (1979)

KITT, Knight Rider (1982)

V.I.K.I., I, Robot (2004)

Jarvis, Iron Man (2008)

ARIIA, Eagle Eye (2008)

GERTY 3000, Moon (2009)

These machines in the movies can talk, think, and even conspire. It's almost a shame that we get to that technology just now. Or maybe we have been careful? Maybe we should really consider what if artificial intelligence really turns into Skynet?
       

Speed of languages

     

When I translate an English text into Chinese, it usually becomes only about 2/3 of the original length. When I hear people speaking Spanish or Japanese, I always feel like hit by a storm of syllables and I would never be able to catch up.

An interesting study was recently published in the journal Language on the speed of human speech. Linguists Pellegrino, Coupé, and Marsico from Université de Lyon recruited 59 volunteers who were native speakers of one of seven languages: English, French, German, Italian, Spanish, Japanese, and Mandarin Chinese. The subjects were instructed to read 20 different passages in their native languages into a recorder. The researcher then counted all of the syllables in each of the recordings and further analyzed how much meaning was packed into each syllable. They arrived at two critical indexes for each language: the average information density for each of its syllables and the average number of syllables spoken per second in ordinary speech.

The intriguing discovery was a negative correlation between information density and speed. The more data-dense the average syllable was, the fewer of those syllables had to be spoken per second, and thus the slower the speech. Out of the seven languages, Japanese was the fastest, spoken at 7.84 syllables per second. And in the density chart, it was at the bottom. Spanish came in second in terms of speed (7.82), and its density was also quite low. Mandarin, the slowest of the seven (5.18), was also the densest language. It seems that the speed of a language depends on the average amount of information its syllable can convey.

The researchers explained, "A dense language will make use of fewer speech chunks than a sparser language for a given amount of semantic information." I guess our brain can only process so much. If the flow of information remains steady according to the capacity of the brain, speed and density have to compensate each other for the speech to be understandable and not boring.

Another explanation could be the languages' sound systems. In languages with fewer consonants and vowels, or no tones, words tend to require more syllables to remain distinct. Hawaiian for example, has only eight consonants and five vowels. That's why you will see long words like humuhumunukunukuāpua'a (state fish of Hawaii) and lauwiliwilinukunuku'oi'oi (another type of fish).
     

Picking cherries

       

When harvesting cherries, the pickers would select only the ripest and healthiest ones. This is a normal and reasonable process. But for outsiders who can only see the selected fruit, it is hard to get the whole picture. They may wrongly conclude that most, or even all, of the fruit is in such good shape.

The term "cherry picking" is thus used to describe the tendency of people favoring information that confirms their preconceptions or hypotheses, while ignoring cases or data that may contradict that position. This "confirmation bias" may occur as selective attention while gathering information. If you believe something/someone is bad, you tend to notice negative evidences more easily or recall mainly bad memories to prove the argument. You see what you are looking for. It can also be partial and biased interpretation. People see things through lenses. Even if two individuals are presented with the same information, they can still draw different conclusions based on their preconceived opinions.

When someone is assigned or paid to advocate a particular position, like a debater or a lawyer, he or she may pick cherries intentionally. In normal circumstances, cherry picking is a common unintentional act that anybody may perform automatically without even noticing. Some scholars explain this with the limitation of our ability to handle complex information. When things get complicated, people tend to look for shortcuts, which in this case mean "availability heuristics" - the ideas that readily come to our mind or easily follow our train of thought.

Other researchers suggest that confirmation bias involves emotional motivations. In a study during the 2004 US presidential election, a group of people were shown contradictory statements by all candidates. A MRI scanner was used to monitor their brain activity when they were asked to evaluate the information. When it came to their favored candidate, the subjects' emotional centers of the brain were aroused, which didn't happen with the other statements. Our desire to believe and to defend our beliefs blinds us. We don't like to be wrong. We intuitively seek to confirm rather than falsify hypotheses because confirmation makes us feel confident and proud. To overrule a preconception, we need very powerful evidences and at the same time very strong will.

Imagine several people going to the same design meeting. Their debriefings after the meeting could be very different. The attendants may have caught only those comments that are in line with their own ideas, or put more importance to the aspects that interest them more. They may recall selectively comments from many previous meetings and insist on their own understandings. They may also interpret the bosses' verbal descriptions as utterly different material forms. With all these different hand-picked "cherries," those who didn't go the meeting would get completely lost.

Preconceptions affect judgment. We should all try to come in neutral and open-minded, and give fair evaluations to different opinions. Making the right call should be more important than proving oneself. I guess it’s easier said than done.
     

Alternative icons

    
Earlier this month, Steve Jobs unveiled the new Foster-designed Apple Headquarters in front of the city council of Cupertino. Judging from the mayor's reactions, Steve can really just build whatever he wants as long as he stays in Cupertino and pay taxes.

To be honest, the donut scheme is so BAD that I think it may as well be anything else. Perhaps they are better off just using their beautiful graphic and product design.

  

E-books or p-books?

    

Amazon announced on Thursday that they are selling more e-books for Kindle than print books (p-books) - hardcover and paperback books combined. Since April 1, 2011, Amazon has sold 105 e-books for every 100 print book. That includes sales of hardcover and paperback books that have no Kindle edition, and not counting free Kindle downloads. This is not even four years since Amazon started the Kindle business in November 2007, and less than one year after they announced that e-book sales surpassed hardcover book sales last July.

This is definitely a significant milestone. But to be honest, I haven't really figured out how I feel about this. I love the physical existence of p-books (hence also known as "real books"). There is the irreplaceable intimacy of feeling it as an object: look, touch, and sometimes smell the fresh ink. But I enjoy my iPad a lot as well. E-books are compact, lightweight - convenient to carry around. They are cheaper and you can get them right away, in the comfort of your own home or on the go. But it's always fun to physically be in bookstores and browse around real books. You can flip through the pages and get a quick idea about the content. It's easier to write notes on the margin of p-books, but e-books are easier to search and the highlight function is really powerful. And the built-in dictionary allows you to check out definitions of words with just one touch.

The most amazing thing about e-books for me is the interactive dimension of the format. Many magazines embed multimedia materials like slideshows, audio and videos in their digital edition, enriching the experience of reading and revolutionizing what we perceive as the publishing industry.

It may look ridiculous nowadays to carry scrolls of papyrus around. But some of them have survived the evolution of technology because they contain valuable original knowledge. Continue this thinking of the basics, both p-books and e-books allow you to do the most important thing - to read a book. The essence is the content. Maybe it doesn't really matter so much what form it takes.
    

First things first

    
In a few hours, it will be twitter's fifth birthday. On March 21, 2006, 9:50pm PST, Jack Dorsey sent out the first tweet ever: "just setting up my twttr". I did a little research and found some interesting things people said at the "first" events of human communication.

The first telegraph through a public line: May 24, 1844
Samuel Morse: "What hath God wrought"

The first successful bi-directional telephone transmission: March 10, 1876
Bell to Watson: "Mr. Watson, come here, I want to see you."

The first licensed radio broadcast: November 2, 1920
Leo Rosenburg: "This is KDKA, of the Westinghouse Electric and Manufacturing Company, in East Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. We shall now broadcast the election returns."

The first sentence said while standing on the surface of the moon: July 20, 1969
Neil Armstrong: "That's one small step for a man, one giant leap for mankind."

The first online chat (via ARPANET link): October 29, 1969
UCLA (type): L
SRI (over the phone): Yes, we see the L.
UCLA (type): O
SRI (over the phone): Yes, we see the O.
UCLA (type): G
And the system crashed.

The first email sent across hosts: 1971
Ray Tomlinson: something like "QWERTYUIOP"... (Test messages were entirely forgettable and I have, therefore, forgotten them.)

The first SMS text message: December 3, 1992
Neil Papworth to Richard Jarvis (via Vodafone GSM network): "Merry Christmas"
  

What's behind abstract art

          
In a recently published study, Boston College psychologists Angelina Hawley-Dolan and Ellen Winner showed 72 undergrad students (40 psychology majors and 32 studio art majors) a series of similar-looking paired images, one by an renowned abstract expressionist such as Mark Rothko and Cy Twombly, and the other by a child or one of the four animals: monkey, gorilla, chimpanzee or elephant. They asked the participants which one they liked more, and which they think is better.

Paintings by animals: (clockwise from top left) monkey, chimpanzee, elephant, elephant.

It turned out that non-art students preferred the professional artwork 56% of the time, while art students did so 62% of the time. But when it came to judging which was the better piece of art, the two groups had very similar results: the art students chose the professional piece 67.5% of the time, and the non-arts 65.5%.

Standing in front of an abstract painting, some people may say, "my grandson could have done that." But the research shows that participants preferred professional paintings and judged them as better more often than the nonprofessional ones. People can tell the differences between an artful human creation and random doodles, even they can't articulate the reasons like art critics and historians do. It seem the art of abstract expression does communicate - it's more accessible than most people think.

What's more interesting to me is that the two questions the researchers asked were phrased to separate personal preference ("like more," which is based on immediate emotional reactions) and and judgment ("better," which is based on cognitive evaluation). People can recognize something is good, but still not like it. Or to put it the other around, when people don't personally like something, they can still judge it as better. It makes me think about art and design criticism. Can we have more professional and objective evaluations than just saying "it dazzles me"?

"Analysis of the justifications revealed that when participants preferred the professional works, and judged them as better, they did so because they saw more intention, planning and skill in those works than those done by nonprofessionals," Hawley-Dolan and Winner write. It seems there are certain patterns behind successful abstract art and design, and an objective criticism is possible.
          

R.I.P. cassette Walkman

        

Sony announced last Friday that it had shipped the last order of cassette-based Walkman and stopped production of the line. First introduced in Japan on July 1, 1979, this iconic device reshaped culture and lifestyle in the 1980s. It was such a cool thing to have: you can "walk" with your own music! Since then, technology of portable personal music has evolved dramatically. It's interesting to see there's a pattern of roughly 8 years between generations of Discman, MD Walkman, and the iPod. Now what we do is to just stream music from Pandora with our smartphones. Where is our music? Somewhere in the cloud I guess...

"High-tech" gadgets become obsolete easily. When was the last time you saw a rotary phone? The last time you took a roll of film to develop? The last time you heard the modem dialing sound? I was actually surprised that Sony was still making cassette Walkman up till last week. It may or may not be a coincident that the end-of-Walkman announcement was made one day before the iPod's 9th birthday on October 23.

Apple is famous for killing old technologies. When the Virgin Megastore in Union Square closed last year, it was kind of ironic to see the "closing" sign right next to an iPod ad. With the first MacBook Air, Apple skipped the optical drive - with all software available online, we won't need discs to install anything. Now the second generation of MacBook Air has just been released and it uses flash chips for data storage. When Steven Jobs said, "we think all notebooks are going to be like this one day," he officially killed the hard drive.

Inside a second generation MacBook Air, there's no hard drive.

I remember ten years ago I was complaining about how inconvenient it was to work with teammates with an iBook - there's no floppy drive! Now I know, it was the first notebook to have built-in wireless networking! People say, things are constantly changing and we need to adapt and survive. I think in the process of evolution, instead of just trying to detect and adapt to the changes, we could be the ones who have visions and cause changes. I bet that's how people at Apple see themselves.

   

Da Vinci the genius

       
There's an exhibition on Leonardo da Vinci at the National Geographic Museum (Washington D.C.) called "Da Vinci - The Genius." I felt weird about the title at first, mainly because I really have problems with the word genius. Plus, I would be more comfortable if it says a genius instead of the. But after visiting the exhibition, I wouldn't protest any more. We all know Mona Lisa and The Last Supper, but a flying machine? A self-propelled car? Projector? Submarine? Old Leo invented all those more than 500 years ago! I have to agree, Leonard da Vinci is the genius.

In addition to painting, Leonardo also excelled in science and engineering. A vast number of inventions appeared as sketches in his journals, but he never actually built the majority of what he designed. Working from Leonardo’s drawings, modern Italian Artisans have faithfully crafted interactive and life-size machines and put together this handsome exhibition to show the great Renaissance master's achievements as an inventor.

Flight section

Parachute, 1483

The Aerial Screw, first ever concept for a helicopter.

Anemoscope

Inclinometer (Level)

Wax Hygrometer

Civil machines section

Self-propelled Car (powered by spring)

Pole Erecting Machine

Screw-cutting Machine

Odometer

Spot Light or Projector

Diving Gear / Breathing Equipment; Lifebuoy on the wall in the back

Paddle Boat

Submarine

Anatomical studies and interaction section

Bevel Gears

Ball Bearings

Last but not least, here's a video showing how the "cam hammer" works (special thanks to the stranger who agreed to operate the machine):

These machines may work or may not work, but they are full of imagination nonetheless. I can totally see the Renaissance man sketching in his notebook like crazy, with lots of "what-ifs" in his head. He was curious, not afraid of dreams. When he had an idea, he strove to recreate his fantasies in reality, while others would easily dismiss it as impossible.