Category: Advice
It’s no secret that I’ve started hacking on my iPhone.
And what’s the most frequent thing I use in development? SSH2 to copy new builds onto the phone and view NSLog output from the shell.
And is it a pain to enter your password every frickin’ time? And is it slow to connect? Yes and HELL yes.
But we can make it better.
First, let’s make a public key that’s compatible with SSH2. Using the id_dsa.pub key generated by OpenSSH on Mac OS X, we’d use these commands:
% ssh-keygen -e -f id_dsa.pub > id_dsa_ssh2_aster.pub % scp id_dsa_ssh2_aster.pub root@192.168.0.100:/var/root/.ssh2
(“aster” is the name of my development machine, where I’m logging into the iPhone from. The “192.168.0.100” is the IP address of the iPhone on my local network. You may need to create the /var/root/.ssh2 directory on the iPhone first.)
Now, on the iPhone, you need to create a file that tells the SSH2 daemon where to find the public key. In /var/root/.ssh2, create a file named “authorization” with the following contents:
key id_dsa_ssh2_aster.pub
If you login from multiple machines, you’d add a new “key” line for each reference to the public key.
That’s all you need to do to avoid the login prompts. We’re halfway there!
Now for the more annoying thing: delays at login. It’s not because the iPhone is doing something stupid like running Javascript: it’s trying to resolve the client host name. Since the iPhone isn’t running lookupd, that’s kinda hard to do, so all we’re really doing is waiting for a timeout :-(
The simple fix is to turn off the “ResolveClientHostName” feature in the SSH2 daemon. As long as we’re tweaking things, let’s also add “NoDelay” to improve TCP network performance. Open /etc/ssh2/sshd2_config on the iPhone and update the configuration to:
# ResolveClientHostName yes
ResolveClientHostName no
...
# NoDelay no
NoDelay yes
Now restart the iPhone and watch your blood pressure decline as you continue hacking.
Update: These instructions assume that you are using OpenSSH2, not Dropbear. Installing OpenSSH2 gives you a full suite of tools for communicating with the iPhone.
Yeah, I see a lot of icons in my business. I often get asked what makes for a successful desktop icon. And I’ve answered many times—but never in public. This essay also gives me a chance to write about something other than the iPhone :-)
Let me begin with this disclaimer: this discussion is directed at independent software (”indie”) developers. Our corporate clients, like Adobe, Apple and Microsoft, have very different needs and objectives when dealing with iconography for software suites. Please also remember that I’m a software developer by trade, not a designer (although, I’m not completely clueless when it comes to the arts.) This discussion will cover a lot of things designers already know—and things that developers need to know.
Before I talk about the specifics of icon design, it’s important to realize what your application icon represents. It’s your brand: it shows up in the Dock, on your download page, and in product reviews. People may remember your app icon more than they remember your product name. A strong icon design results in an equally strong brand.
What do you think of when I describe an icon that’s a truck sporting a yellow cab with a purple cargo?
That’s Transmit’s brand. It’s so good, other people want to use it.
Would you believe that people actually thank us for making that little truck icon? It’s true—an icon can have a huge impact on people’s perception of your product. If your app is a joy to look at in the Dock, people will be in the right frame of mind when launching the application.
This effect of good design is contagious, too. The Twitterrific icon is an example; the strength of the icon has carried over into other applications either directly or indirectly. People associate a blue bird with Twitter now—at the time we created the application, Twitter’s only brand was the word mark.
It’s also important for your design to be unique. The world doesn’t need another globe icon for a network application. Be careful about using the “document and tool on the desktop” metaphor; it may be recommended by the HIG, but it also means you’re playing on a field crowded with other similar designs.
Of course there is still room for creativity when working with familiar metaphors. If you look at Bryan Bell’s icon for NetNewsWire or Jon Hicks’ work for Firefox, you’ll see that the globe is a secondary element in the design. The complementary colors of the satellite and the fox are what draw your eye and make the image memorable.
One of the most unique icons to come around in a long time it the Coda icon. (I feel fine making that claim because I had no substantive involvement in its design—I’m just happy to have it in my Dock.)
There’s a interesting story that went along with this icon’s creation. This story illustrates how much thinking and rethinking goes into a successful design. It also shows that you shouldn’t work in a vacuum when dealing with something as important as defining your brand.
The early concepts for Coda’s app icon was a forklift; a natural extension to the Panic truck. But the release of a similar application that used this metaphor forced us to consider a new direction. In retrospect, that was one of the best things that happened in the project.
So without a forklift to work with, some more brainstorming ensued. Gedeon Maheux came up with the idea of using a leaf or seedling to represent the continual care and growth that a web application typically receives. Dave Brasgalla started developing this concept with a series of hand drawn sketches and simple vector artwork.
Original concept sketch for Coda
Cabel Sasser, who did the UI design for Coda, liked the concept sketch, but was hesitant about its use in their product. Ged convinced him it was a good idea because of its uniqueness.
Once we got the go ahead from Cabel, David Lanham started developing the icon. As with any design job, there were multiple revisions before everyone was happy. I first saw the icon toward its final revision (before the addition of trichomes and the rearrangement of water droplets.) Like Cabel, I had doubts about the icon’s simplicity.
Coda icon before its final release
The deciding factor was that it stood out on product website and in a list of other icons. Its simplicity and uniqueness was its greatest strength.
Composition showing how Coda icon would show up on Panic website
And the punchline for this story: a conversation with Cabel at this year’s WWDC revealed that he and Steven Frank originally had the idea of doing a leaf to represent their web studio application. But they discounted it and never mentioned it anyone. I guess that means that great minds really do think alike :-)
Note: There’s more that I’d like to show about this project, but I don’t want to steal any thunder from Cabel and his presentation at C4. Hopefully this post will whet your appetite as much as a link to Gina’s. It would also be safe to assume that this post will be updated sometime after our little get together in Chicago :-)
So what should you look for when developing your own application icon? It’s really pretty simple when you get down to it—the key elements are:
- Color
- Shape
When dealing with these elements, strive for simplicity and clarity. How the icon looks at 16×16 pixels is just as important as its representation at 512×512. Complexity in the larger sizes will not work well at the smaller sizes. A vibrant color that looks great at 16×16 might be overpowering at 512×512.
To get an idea of how these two elements are important, let’s do a little experiment. (Regular readers will find that I love doing “real world” tests to back up my statements.)
Open your Applications folder and set the list view to the smallest size (16×16.) Now scroll down through the list and pick out which icons jump out at you. Now ask yourself why—the answer is color and/or shape.
Here are the applications that caught my interest, their strongest design element, and some thoughts I have about each one:
Adium (color & shape)
A green duck makes a strong statement, although I think making the color a preference is taking customization a bit too far.
Firefox (color)
Circular icons tend to be overused, but the fox’s “C” shape overcomes this.
GarageBand (shape)
A unique shape that draws the attention of people who like music (like me.)
NetNewsWire (color)
The complementary colors in this icon are particularly strong and make for a very dynamic icon.
PhotoBooth (color)
Unique in that it successfully uses a gradient—ranges of color typically get lost in smaller sizes.
Skype (color & shape)
One of the few icons that incorporates the word mark clearly and successfully.
Parallels (color & shape)
I have no idea what the shape represents, but it’s unique and clearly represents the brand. Without the gold coloring, the shape would be reminiscent of the brand used by DC Shoes.
QuickTime (shape & color)
A clever icon that uses the letter “Q” to represent the brand. It’s been around a long time and still looks good—you can’t say that about most applications that were released in the early 1990’s.
Hopefully this essay has given you some basic insights on how to approach the design (or redesign) of your application’s icon. There’s no way that a fantastic icon can overcome crappy code, but something nice to look at will definitely affect people’s perception of your hard work. And be sure to give brand development as much care and thought as the lines of source code in your project: it’s not something that you just slap on your application before you ship.
Want to make your site look better on the iPhone with one line of HTML?
It’s easy—just add a <meta> tag that lets the iPhone know how wide to display the initial page. I added the following code to the <head> in my template yesterday:
<meta name="viewport" content="width=808" />
Every browser besides MobileSafari will ignore this information. But it does something very important on the iPhone: it optimizes the viewport for your content.
By default, the iPhone uses a viewport of 980 pixels—a value chosen to maximize compatibility with a broad range of web sites. When you specify the viewport width explicitly, you will eliminate any empty space between that 980 pixels and the width of your <body> element.
On this site the <body> is 808 pixels wide, so there were 172 pixels of content-free space being used to display the page. On a screen that’s 320 pixels wide, that’s significant. So much so, that by making this simple change, the headings on my blog posts are now readable on first load of the page (previously, the text was too small.)
As always, a picture is worth a thousand words. Here are the changes that could be made on a couple of my favorite web sites:
Zeldman
Looking at Jeffrey’s CSS file, I see:
html {
min-width: 742px;
}
So his one line of code would be:
<meta name="viewport" content="width=742" />
That’s all folks!
Daring Fireball
Likewise, Gruber had specified this CSS:
body {
...
min-width: 760px;
}
Which would mean this addition to the <head>:
<meta name="viewport" content="width=760" />
But there’s a problem…
MobileSafari uses a heuristic to adjust the viewport based on the width and aspect ratio of the page. And since Gruber is a man of many words, the page is long and the initial scale for the viewport isn’t optimal. So he could use this instead:
<meta name="viewport" content="width=760, initial-scale=0.4" />
But his problems aren’t over yet—there’s still an issue with usability. You can double-tap to zoom in to read an article—and when you double-tap to zoom back out, you’re using the suboptimal scale factor again. This is easy to work around by specifying a minimum scaling factor:
<meta name="viewport" content="width=760, initial-scale=0.4, minimum-scale=0.4" />
And it’s still just one line of code!
Are you wondering how I came up with that magic scaling factor of 0.4? I used a tried and true development practice: trial and error. While using this sophisticated technique, make sure to close the window in MobileSafari (by clicking on the red X icon.) The viewport scale is not modified when you refresh the page, so you’ll only see changes when starting on a new page.
Hopefully, Jeffrey and John will read this post and make the changes to their sites—I like reading them on the iPhone :-)
Update: WordPress is turning the double quotes in the examples above into smart quotes. You’ll want to convert them before adding them to your template. And for more information on viewports, check the Apple iPhone developer page (you must click on “Optimizing for Page Readability” to view it.)
If you’re an iPhone owner, you’ve probably encountered a problem with scrolling. For the most part it’s very intuitive, but there are occasions where you can’t get to what you want. The problem is that there aren’t any traditional scroll bars, so it seems like you are stuck. Even very smart engineers who know a lot about mobile computing are having problems.
Here are a couple of situations I’ve encountered:
- While editing in a text area with a lot of text. You probably have resorted to using the insertion point to (slowly) reposition the text.
- On a web page has content displayed using the CSS scroll:auto property. You’re stuck looking at the top of a <div> and can’t get to the lower part of the content.
Fortunately there is a very simple, yet unintuitive, solution for both of these situations. Use two fingers to scroll the content.
Flicking doesn’t work, but it’s better than nothing. I certainly wouldn’t design an interface around this “feature” due to its lack of discoverability—just use it as a workaround to deal with existing sites. And considering that people are submitting bug reports about scrolling not working, it looks like Apple has some work left to do with this “scroll within a scroll” gesture.
Credit for finding this trick goes to Matthew Krivanek on the iPhoneWebDev mailing list. I found his post while looking for solutions to the fixed positioning problem in MobileSafari.