2007 Dodge Magnum

2007 Dodge Magnum XSTOver the weekend I took a little trip to Toronto and Niagara Falls. To get there I rented a car, (pictured right, it was cheaper than the train). The photos aren’t that great, I forgot my camera so had to make do with my phone. After reserving the smallest car possible online with Hertz I showed up and was told that the smallest they had in was a Dodge Magnum. That’s like a free upgrade to business class on the plane!

Once I had my great car I took the weekend to enjoy it, and the pleasures of Toronto and Niagra Falls. While driving though, I noticed several things about the Dodge Magnum that I would do differently and thought that this car is an excellent example of real-world design, (as opposed to the web-world of design I usually am immersed in), but had a few things that could be changed.

What I like

If you’ve seen a Magnum you probably already know the good. This car looks awesome. Whoever came up with the look of this car is a genius. They’ve taken a station wagon and made it really cool. My neighbours and girlfriend thought it looked like a mini-limo. The car looks fast, powerful, and aggressive.

The interior is great too. It’s spacious and has lots of storage space. My SXT, (not the top-end model), had a pretty decent sound system as well, and I could hook up my iPod to it.

Even though the SXT’s 250 horsepowerful engine is much less powerful than the top of the line HEMIs it provides enough power for highway driving with a slight load.

What I would change

Control levers on the left side of the steering wheelThe first thing that I noticed when I started to drive was that there is an extra lever on the left side of the steering wheel where I only expect to find the turning signal control, (pictured left). This is the cruise control and is quite annoying until you get used to it. I couldn’t see either of the two levers while driving and don’t feel I should have to look down to signal, and every time I tried to turn I would try to signal with the cruise control. When driving on the highway it was handy to have the cruise in such an accessable place but I suspect most people will spend much more time in the city than on the highway and will want the cruise put somewhere else.

Driver's side shoulder check viewWhen trying to do a shoulder check on the driver’s side of the car I found my view was mostly of pillars and I didn’t see much road, (pictured right). Visibility in general in the Magnum is not as great as it could be, however, this is a large car and with larger vehicles come larger blindspots.

One other thing I noticed about this car, although this isn’t a design issue, is the fuel economy. The SXT is powerful, but not extremely powerful, however it still uses a lot of gas. I barely made it from Montr&eague;al to Toronto on a tank of gas, which worked out to something like 514 kilometers on 63 liters of gas, not that great. I can’t imagine how much gas the high-end HEMIs must burn.

Overall, the Dodge Magnum is a great car, however I wouldn’t buy it because of the odd placement of the cruise control, the bad sightlines, and the bad fuel economy.

2.0 Outside of the Web

Sometimes a buzzword takes on a life of it’s own. The current example: 2.0. While not exactly a word, when you pair it with something else you get something like “Web 2.0” or, as I read about in yesterday’s Montreal Gazette, “Cemetery 2.0.” Cemetery 2.0 is a device attached to a tombstone that has a satellite internet connection and acts as a web terminal to allow grave site visitors to view the deceased’s surviving web presence, including things such as a Facebook profile and Flickr photos.

While the idea of having something more than a piece of stone to remember someone by is great, I’m really writing about the name here. Cemetery 2.0 is a bit too trendy of a name, an example of a buzzword going too far, and being taken to places where it probably shouldn’t be used. What happens when the Cemetery 2.0 goes into production and a second version comes out? Do we get Cemetery 2.0 2.0?

Apostrophe

Apostrophes are often misused, as I noticed over the past few years. So, I am writing on the proper use of the apostrophe and the logic behind its rules.

Apostrophes only have two uses: to indicate that something has been taken out of the word, (or words), written, and to indicate a word is possessive when used with an “s.” Apostrophes are not used to pluralize words. To tell the truth, there is only the first usage, but this requires a history lesson which I’ll get to later.

Contractions

Contractions are the result of replacing letters or spaces with apostrophes, (this is the first use: indicating something has been taken out). For example, when “can not” becomes “can’t” the space and letters “n” and “o” are replaced by an apostrophe. Similarly, when “she is” becomes “she’s” the space and letter “i” are replaced by an apostrophe. Of course, it also works on proper nouns. For example, in “John’s going to the market” “John is” has been shortened to “John’s.” Incidentally, “John’s” is the same spelling and pronunciation as the possessive form of “John,” but not the plural form.

Possessive not Plural

Now for the history lesson. Once, a long, long time ago, a word made possessive was indicated by adding the letters “es” to the end of a word. For example, the sentence “Johnes house is big,” meant that my house is big. Over time, an apostrophe replaced the letter “e” and as a result, words are now usually made possessive by adding an apostrophe “s” to them. In modern English the sentence above reads “John’s house is big.”

Since a plural is generally indicated by adding a single “s” to the end of a word there is no “e,” or anything else for that matter. So, to pluralize, an apostrophe is never used. For this reason sentences like “Banana’s are on sale” or “Let the dog’s out” are incorrect.

Its, It’s, Your and You’re

The word “it” and its possessive can be quite confusing. It seems like the possessive should be written “it’s” but this is not the case. The reason is that “it” was invented after we had started using apostrophes to indicate possessive words, so there was never an “e” to replace. For this reason “it” has its own special possessive form similar to “his,” “your” and “yours,” and “her” and “hers.” The possessive form of “it” is “its.” Because the possessive form of “it” is “its,” the only time an apostrophe should ever be used with the word “it” is when writing a contraction such as “it’s sunny out” for “it is sunny out.”

“Your” and “you’re” also can be confusing because they both sound the same. The possessive of “you” is “your” but “you’re” is the contraction of “you are.” So, “your coat is dirty” is correct, but “you’re coat is dirty” is not; this is because it means “you are coat is dirty.”

Slang and Accents

Sometimes an apostrophe is used to help write slang or accents. In this case, as above, an apostrophe is used to replace missing letters and spaces. Some examples are “y’all” and “ma’am,” which if written out would be “you all” and “madam.” Using apostrophes to write slang and accents isn’t very common, and is only needed in a very few specialized circumstances.

Conclusion

To sum up, all you have to remember is to never use an apostrophe when writing a plural. Keep it for contractions and possessives. If you are confused about whether or not to write “its” or “it’s,” remember that the only reason to use an apostrophe with “it” is for a contraction – so if “it is” doesn’t fit “it’s” doesn’t either. The same rule applies to “your” and “you’re.” If “you are” is wrong so is “you’re.” So long for now, and happy writing!

Picasa Updates

According to a blog post by Google they updated Picasa yesterday, (although the Picasa Readme is dated September 15). It looks good and brings a bunch of new features most notably Picasa Web Albums, sort of a Flickr that goes along with Picasa. So, I thought I’d compare them side by side.

I’ll be comparing the free versions of both services since I think that’s what most people will want and I’m too cheap to pay for the advanced versions.

We’ll start with with Picasa Web Albums

Picasa Web Albums have a pretty cool AJAX based interface that’s pretty fast loading and easy to use. Also, the web albums integrate seamlessly into Picasa itself. Uploading is easy and fast and you can be shown the web album right away. It’s lots of fun and super easy.

You are limited to 250 MB of storage, (as opposed to Flickr that limits how much you can upload each month), but can upgrade to 6.25 GB for US$25/year.

There are several drawbacks however. The Picasa software itself is available for Windows only and you must use the Picasa software to create a web album. Also, you can only have a Picasa Web Album if you are invited so this isn’t truly open to the public yet.

Using the Picasa software you can geotag images using Google Earth and it’s pretty cool but the geotags don’t carry through to the web album. And finally, part of your URL for your Picasa Web Album is your Google username, which is also the first part of your Gmail address. This, in my opinion, is an invitation for spam.

Now for Flickr

The most basic difference between Picasa Web Albums and Flickr is that the Picasa system is built around the software whereas Flickr is built around the website and community.

Flickr offers its users unlimited storage but you can only upload 20 MB of photos each month. Also only 200 of your photos will show on your page, (although the photos will still be in the Flickr system somewhere). If you choose to upgrade to Flickr’s Pro account for US$24.95/year you get a 2 GB of upload bandwidth per year and your photos appear on your page forever.

Uploading your images to Flickr is perhaps slightly more challenging than uploading from Picasa but Flickr offers a piece of software called Uploadr to help you on your way. Uploadr offers resizing and drag & drop uploading and it tells you how much of your upload limit you have used. Flickr Uploadr is also available from Flickr itself for both Windos and OS X, and a version is available from a Flickr community member that runs on Linux.

Finally Flickr offers tagging and really easy geotagging, (using Yahoo! Maps and the tags & geotags are available for the world to see, (if you let them).

To wrap up while Picasa is great to organize photos on your own Windows PC if you really want to share your photos and be part of a photo sharing community Flickr is the way to go. That’s why you see photos embedded here from Flickr.

Font Size Reference

I usually designate a font size in my CSS on either the html or body tag using a percentage then size the rest of my document using ems. The reason I use a percentage value instead of just specifying the base font size in pixels is so that users can change their font size in their browsers if they choose.

Since most, if not all, web browsers use 16px as their base font size I can set my base font size using this formula:

percentage = 100(base font size/16)

Just insert your desired base font size in pixels into the formula and you will have the correct percentage to use in your CSS.

And now a handy cheat sheet if you don’t want to do the math:

Pixels to Percentage
Pixels Percentage
8 50
9 56.25
10 62.5
11 68.75
12 75
13 81.25
14 87.5
15 93.75
16 100
17 106.25
18 112.5

A quick disclaimer: there may be a browser out there that doesn’t use 16px as its base font size that I don’t know about. Also, this works only if you haven’t already changed your font size somewhere else.