I get several hundred email messages per day across several accounts, gigs and points of reference.
I don’t use a single rule. I have one inbox. I treat them all the same way.
Required reading.
"So, the big realization with 2.0 is that I tried to do too much. Which is, you know, like being in a job interview and saying your biggest fault is you work too hard. But it turned out to be a big disservice to my customers,"
Wil Shipley: “we tried to do too much” for Delicious Library 2
I saw this very same thing ultimately put a software developer I used to work for out of business. To balance features, compatibility, boundary cases, and need is a hard line to walk but it is one that a developer must to survive.
(via Subtraction)
First this is not nearly as impressive as what Google has built, but when you have several email addresses and a filing system you like, using Gmail is just not that practical (at least not for me).
That’s kind of where I am at after the initial excitement over the potential of the idea. He also covers some of the rules he uses to achieve similar results. I love this one:
Basically it is looking for my work email address to show up in the CC field, and then checking to see if my name appears in the message body. If my name is not in the message body and I have been CCd on the email, the email is then marked read and archived.
Brilliant.
(via Shawn Blanc)
Now I have had some time to digest all of the announcements at Apple’s Music/Media Event held yesterday. I took the time to watch the keynote and have read several news and pundit posts about it. One thing that stood out to me is how much “small” was promoted as a feature. Seriously, if one were to build a drinking game around that word and all of it’s synonyms, one would have been under the table passed out half way through the event. Every single product that was rolled out got a reduction in dimensions and that fact was highlighted heavily. Let’s go down the list:
iPod shuffle — Smaller and thinner than not only the last generation but also the generation before that it most closely resembles.
IPod nano — Cut virtually in half and put on a diet. Now small enough to wear as a large watch.
iPod touch — Even more thin than the past generation which already seemed impossibly so.
Apple TV — Small enough to fit in a jeans pocket. I would be watching my house guests quite a bit more closely if I owned one of these.
There are many reasons why small matters. The one that immediately pops to mind is that, with the exception of the Apple TV, these are portable devices and a reduction in size makes them even more so. That said, here is the other thing that comes to my mind, the technology disappears. You forget it is there. Suddenly, there is no player, your music exists in your ears and you no longer feel it clipped to your shirt or in your pocket. Suddenly, there is no set top box, the movies just appear on your screen. Makes me wonder how long it will be before they really are gone and all that is left is the experience.
The new Apple TV. Your TV, simplified.
(Don’t worry, I have something to say about everything released today but real life has me waiting to sit down and write it.)
What? That? Up there? The picture? Well, I’ll tell you about that in a second. First, a story…
Before my wife, Princess Bethany, and I got married, we took a course on money management for couples. The course was led by Ruth Hayden, author of the very excellent book For Richer, Not Poorer: The Money Book for Couples. You should buy it. Seriously. You see, money differences and problems are one of the leading causes of breakups and divorce. Anyway, one of the strategies she advocates is to figure out how much money you need every month for your day to day stuff beyond bills, divide it by 31 to find your daily budget, and then get that amount in cash (yes, the dead tree, smokable kind). Spending cash makes you very conscious of exactly how much you have to spend. The rule is that when it’s gone, it’s gone, and you have to do without.
It’s a killer idea and one I don’t do often enough. Largely because getting and dealing with cash these debit card days is kind of a pain. Online purchases in iTunes, Amazon orders, software purchases - there are plenty of things you can’t easily pay for in cash. Which brings me to the screenshot above. It’s an iPhone app called Left to Spend (iTunes link). Here is how the developer describes it:
To use ‘Left to spend’, all you need to do is set up a daily allowance that you KNOW won’t break your budget. Every day this amount will be added to your total allowance. Whenever you spend money you simply open ‘Left to spend’ and enter the amount, which is then subtracted from your total allowance. If your total allowance is running low, you need to slow down your spending and wait for your allowances to accumulate. As long as you never get below 0, you’ll never have to worry about money again.
Yep, a solution to the problem. Cash, or no cash, track spending just the way it was recommended in my story above. It’s an elegant little app that does one thing well (Paging Mr. Mottram!). Not only that but it is an excellent first project for a struggling student abroad so help him out with a few cents from your daily budget.
(Submitted to Minimal Mac by the developer, Lauge Jepsen. Full disclosure; He did give me a freebie code to check it out. Doing so did not guarantee a review – positive or otherwise.)
The only worry I have about Priority Inbox is the additional complexity it adds to Gmail. As I said this past week on TWiG, Gmail is just getting stuffed with new and more advanced features: phone calling, Buzz, Tasks, and now this, not to mention the (awesome, but huge) buffet of optional features in Labs.
So, the web is all, um, atwitter about GMail’s new Priority Inbox feature. It basically takes a backwards approach to their already excellent spam filtering by using the technology to help filter up the messages that are most important to you.
There is lots of coverage on this already today but I am linking to Gina’s piece because a) it is a nice, concise overview but also b) she brings up the important observation quoted above.
GMail has such an overwhelming myriad of settings, features and options now it is becoming increasingly difficult to navigate. Priority Inbox is a compelling feature but I sure would have an even easier time dealing with my mail if there were not chat lists and buzzing and themes and all sorts of other stuff I had to turn off just to, you know, check my email.
There is also the increasing privacy concerns. By using this new feature, you basically are telling Google what and who matters to you. They will use that info to both provide a better experience and push more relevant ads to you. Sure, they are already doing this to some extent with the ads that are already there. That said, this will surely help them make that data even more precise. Do you trust them? Is this a fair trade off?
To paraphrase a dead old white guy, perhaps those who give up privacy for the sake of inbox sanity deserve neither.
To say the app has barely changed since 2008 is, of course, not to say that Simplenote is the same as it was two years ago. It has been refined, polished, and updated with taste.
Not to get all Simplenote crazy but I would be remiss if I did not link to Mr. Blanc here. He took my call to have people share what is in their Simplenote to a whole new level. Bravo!
"Nature is more complex than anything humans could imagine, but nature is precisely as complex as it needs to be and not one bit more, which makes it simple."
Jonathan Harris – SimplicityThe following is a guest post from my friend Julio Ojeda-Zapata. He is a technology writer for The Saint Paul Pioneer Press (my hometown paper), geek, and all around great guy. You may also know him from his appearances on This Week in Tech.
I think there are many out there who struggle to find the same control over their workplace computing environment as they do their home. For most, there is less choice at work over the tools you are given to use. As someone who works for themselves, I wanted to have someone speak to this quandary and tell their story. Thankfully, Julio was happy to step up to the podium.
My cubicle at work made me uneasy for years, and I couldn’t put my finger on why. This year, it dawned on me what had bothered me for so long — It was my computer stand.

You probably know the kind. It’s an adjustable metal apparatus with dual surfaces, one for a PC and monitor, the other for the keyboard and mouse. The surfaces slide backwards and forwards with a yank or a shove, as well as upwards and downwards via a rubber-sheathed metal crank.
My workplace has dozens of the stands, positioned alongside cubicle desks. My co-workers toil on the stands without complaint. In a bit of an epiphany, though, my long-suppressed hatred for these Rube Goldberg contraptions bubbled to the surface — and I knew I had to be rid of mine.
To grasp why this stand bothered me so much, you need to know how I work in my home office.

I have the simplest of desks, consisting of a sturdy rubberwood table my wife and I picked up at Pier One Imports for a pittance when we were newlyweds. It was our cozy dining-room table for a long time, until we bought something larger and more appropriate for entertaining our friends.
Then it became my workstation. It was too tall for typing, but my wife — who, unlike yours truly, can be trusted with power tools — fixed this by taking inches off the legs and reattaching them.
Thus transformed, the table became a single, broad work surface for a succession of all-in-one Macs, with plenty of room to spare for peripherals and the printouts I fan out when I am writing.
The table is typing and mousing heaven, with an obscenely ample area for my optical rodent to roam unimpeded, and curved edges that cause no irritation to my underarms and wrists during my marathon work sessions.
Commercial computer tables don’t measure up. These range from cheapo OfficeMax versions with ridiculous slide-out keyboard trays, to hyper-expensive variations from the likes of Anthro and Biomorph. Sure, the latter are elegant and ergonomic — even electrically powered, in some higher-end cases, for raising and lowering with push-button ease — but I’m not about to spend hundreds or thousands for such Lexus-like furniture.
My rubberwood desk adheres to the Minimal Mac ideal: It does its duty with absolute simplicity, maximum efficiency, minimal cost, extreme elegance and complete comfort.
My PC stand at work offends me in many so ways. The faux-wood typing surface is barely wide enough for the keyboard, with little extra room for a mouse. Its legs are enamel-painted metallic tubes ending in ugly, jagged-edged openings; the rubber covers intended to camouflage this are always missing. So is that absurd hand crank, forcing me to go in a frantic hunt for a substitute.
A couple of months ago, I reached my breaking point and had the stand banished. I needed no replacement brought in, as it turned out. I already had one: my cubicle’s desk.

This surface was too tall for comfortable computing, but I knew it could be lowered to precisely the right height. I’m sure millions of cubicles around the world have the same flexibility.
With my stand gone and my desk adjusted, I sighed in relief as I rolled my computer chair up to the ultrawide typing station and got busy (on a Mac, of course). This felt just like my rubberwood table back home. All the mechanical complexity was gone; a single, exquisitely positioned work surface remained. I like my job, and this allowed me to like doing it.
My new computer setup, though, made me something of an office oddball. Visitors to my cubicle would become flustered as they sensed something amiss — it took them a second or two to see that the PC stand was gone. No one at my office, to my knowledge, has ever done such a thing.
But I’ll never go back. This is what freedom feels like.