Good luck.

I say this because, with Codecademy, I only feel like I’m getting a trickle of vocabulary and not seeing the big picture. I’m halfway through the track and I’ve learned about variables, functions, arrays, and for loops but I still have no idea how any of these tools fit work together to make an interactive website. It would be like learning vocabulary but not learning how to write a sentence or a paragraph. Or what the language sounds like.

I’m not one to complain without offering solutions so I will make a suggestion: keep everything about the introduction the same except with a link at the end to webpage that uses JavaScript. Then link back to a page that shows how the HTML/CSS/JS work together. Then – and this is important – use it as a reference point throughout the track . So many of the exercises feel like simple “vocabulary” because they have no context. If I knew how a particular tool would be helpful in the future it would provide the context that is sorely lacking.

On a side note: I have been thinking about this for a few days. Today, I read the first chapter of JavaScript: The Definitive Guide. The first chapter ends, as you might have guessed, with an illustration like I suggested above – and it was very helpful.

Although the narrow focus is disappointing, I still can’t discount Codecademy as an excellent entry point into programming. I never expected it to be the end-all of my learning and I have already begun to look for resources to continue learning about JavaScript once I finish the Codecademy track. I found a promising lead here - I’ll try to not get too distracted until I finished what I started. I’ll get back to Codecademy … right after I finish the second chapter of JavaScript: The Definitive Guide.

Coming up: reference resources and Learn Python the Hard Way progress report.

I liked the Learn to Program class very much and wanted to do more through Coursera for my next project/review. However, I wanted to do more with Python and there were no more introductory/intermediate programming classes offered. After snooping around I discovered Learn Python the Hard Way by Zed Shaw. I’m working through this course now (and loving it). A full review on LPtHW will come when I’m finish.

Python is well and good but I realized that a scripting language mainly used on the Web would be rather lonely without the company of HTML and CSS. Shaw, unfortunately, does not have any materials for either CSS or HTML. I knew that Codecademy had an HTML module so I decide to have a look.

My did my first dabbling programming on Codecademy when it was still in beta. At the time I thought the introductory JavaScript track was a fun and interesting diversion but I promptly forgot all about the site when I finished.

What is it?

Web Fundamentals is more robust than the JavaScript introduction from back when. The goal of the course is, as the name suggest, to teach students “the building blocks of web development with HTML and CSS.”

How does it work?

The Web Fundamentals track is divided into six sections (e.g., Introduction to HTML)  and each section has two courses (e.g. Project: Build Your Own Website is the second course in the Introduction to HTML section). Each course has anywhere from six to twenty-six exercises. The track starts with HTML and ends with students using their knowledge of HTML and CSS to build a web page.

The exercises are  the centerpiece of the Codecamy experience.  Each exercise has careful instructions for students to follow and an input area for testing. Another column displays the output of what students are typing and updates as you type. The layout is mostly very good and makes experimentation painless. My only complaint regarding layout is HTML code tends to get rather long and side-scrolling to see what is happening in the far margins becomes quite a chore. I ended up using JS Bin for the longer exercises, copying and pasting when I was ready to move on.

Students are expected to produce the results of the instructions to advance in the exercises. There criteria to advance are clearly stated in each exercise but the system was forgiving enough to allow variety of student input. I admit to being frustrated more than once because I thought the computer was not recognizing my perfect code. More often than not I had not read the instructions carefully and had missed a crucial detail. There is an option to skip an exercise if you do not get the correct answer but I never needed to do so.

I found the explanation of some exercises to be needlessly confusing. I appreciate that each exercise attempts to break down the element being taught to its smallest, logical part but I wish that some more in-depth explanations had been offered on some exercises. These frustrations were infrequent, but present.

Did it work?

I think so. There were more than a few ‘ah-ha!’ moments as the exercises had me re-creating elements of web pages I had interacted with many times.In fact, the constant re-creation and doing is what makes Codecademy shine. I could have learned everything in this track from a book, of course, but following the instructions and seeing the results immediately is empowering. I wasn’t afraid to experiment  beyond what was called for in the exercises and ended up reading quite a lot about HTML/CSS standards outside Codecademy. Although the track doesn’t (and probably can’t) teach good design principles I feel like I could build a website from scratch that looks ‘acceptable’ to most laypersons. Nothing worthy of a Webby, of course, but certainly better than nothing!

Should you try it?

If you know nothing about HTML or CSS and want to learn, I give Web Fundamentals my full recommendation. Knowing where to start is a major hurdle for learning any new skill. Web Fundamentals is a perfect entry point. The track will not make you a master of web design but it will give you all the tools you need to get started.

Codecademy is also free, and signup is painless.

What’s next?

I’m plugging away at LPtHW and starting in on the JavaScript track at Codecademy. I’ll have a review of both when I’m finished. My long-term plan is to take all of the Codecademy tracks, finish LPtHW and then move on to Learn Ruby the Hard Way.

Was this review helpful? Not so much? Let me know in the comments!

Is there another programming method/class/book I should try? Tell me! 

The discussion in the last couple hours has mostly been concerned about whether or not this is the fabled Steam Box: the near-mythical console rumored to be in development by Valve.  I’m not sure what the Piston is exactly, but I do know that Valve are going after the next generation of console gamers in a big way.

Between the Lines

There are a couple things going on here. First, Valve is just an investor. Their branding doesn’t appear on the device and it doesn’t seem so far like they have had any say in the development of the Piston. Of course, ‘Piston’ falls in line with the locomotive-naming of Valve but that could be coincidental. Xi3 has made this device to work with Steam and its Big Picture More, not the other way around (although the device is being showcased in Valve’s booth at CES). I think this is an important distinction that I’ll clarify in a minute.

Another thing worth pointing out is how expandable this device seems to be. Lot’s of ports, three different mother boards all point to plenty of room for expansion and customization. Hardly in line with tinkering-averse consoles.

What Is the Piston?

The Piston, I think is meant to be a hybrid PC gaming and console device. I’m guessing Xi3 wants you to use this guy to play games on your TV but keep it at home on your desk, running wires from your Piston to your PC monitor and your TV. I do not think it’s meant to be a standalone console or a more traditional-use PC. This is a theory, of course, and a big problem with this theory is that the Piston is currently a Linux device – not an OS I would choose for a hybrid device to steal consumers away from easy-to-use consoles.

What Isn’t the Piston?

More abstractly, the Piston seems to be a beachhead for Valve into gamer’s living rooms. I don’t think this is THE Steam Box (as conceptualized by the rumor mill to be a device specifically by Valve as a console replacement). The Piston isn’t going to be Vavle’s only entry into living rooms – it’s going to be one of many. Like I said above, Valve is investing in Xi3 with this project but Xi3 are making this device specifically to work with Steam. This is all theorizing, again, but I see the Piston as one entry point among many more to come. Steam will be the platform on which other gaming PCs come storming onto your television.

UPDATE:

From Polygon -

“Valve will be at CES to meet with hardware and content developers in our booth space,” Lombardi said. “We are bringing multiple custom (hardware) prototypes as well as some off-the-shelf PCs to our CES meetings.”

Lombardi described the prototypes as “low-cost, high-performance designs for the living room that are great candidates for Steam and Big Picture.

You can thank me later.

Without further ado, here are my predictions for 2013 in no particular order of chronology or import.

Original Content from Video Streaming Services Makes Impact of Some Sort

Boldly stated, no?

Netflix and Hulu have been providing their own content for a while but Netflix seems to be trying to elevate their current offerings with its new drama, House of Cards and the resurrection of fan-favorite Arrested Development. I’m hedging a bit here because I think success or failure have some very different outcomes.

Netflix is releasing both of these shows in their entirety a significant departure from the traditional slow-drip release of television. It makes sense for Netflix: they’re not dependent on recurring ad-revenue and any subscribers they’re likely to gain from the release of this content are likely to wait until the show is complete to sign up for the service for a month and end their subscription when they finish. Offering a show in its entirety is a good way to slake the thirst of an impatient audience and may win subscribers who are tired of the cable model. A major win with these two shows could have a snowball effect for Netflix: more subscribers to provide more content, etc.

On the other hand, both shows could flop. I love Arrested Development but I’m not entirely certain that it’s a show that will swell the Netflix subscriber numbers. House of Cards looks to be a solid drama but is going to need a lot of buzz to get the curious to sign up. In other words, it needs to be damned good to keep the rubberneckers eyes glued to Netflix.

The Demise of Phone Subsidies and the Two-Year Contract

This trend has its roots in 2012: first with the unlocked Nexus 4 selling for $299.99 and later with T-Mobile announcing they would offer financing on phones for their customers. I’m guessing that 2013 will see more middle-to-high-end phones like the Nexus 4 moving down in price and mobile customers opting for the unlocked mid-range phone for $199-$299 and no contract. I’m really going to go out on a limb and say that in 2013 Apple will release the iPhone 5S, lower the price of the unsubsidized 4S to $199 and make the subsidized iPhone 5 $99. 

New Consoles from Microsoft and Sony

I think the most surprising thing here will be how thoroughly underwhelming the ‘next generation’ will feel. Expect a lot of fancy screenshots and talk about ‘integration’ but little in the way of tangible evolution of gaming. That’s always the way console launches go but I doubt there will be an appreciable difference in graphical output for the masses to get very excited. I do expect Microsoft to marry Xbox Live and Windows 8/Surface in some meaningful way (console-to-PC streaming perhaps?)

If you’re looking for waves in console gaming, I suspect it will come from Valve. Though probably not this year.

People Will Start to Pay Attention to Privacy Policies

Ha ha ha … whooo … alright, I’m done laughing. Whoo boy. Who am I kidding? Privacy still won’t be a ‘big issue’ in 2013 and probably won’t be until Facebook does something so flagrantly icky that heads can’t help but turn.

I was also drawn to Coursera because I have wanted to begin to learn about programming for some time. Of course, there are entire libraries devoted to aspiring coders but I stayed away from the books and websites because I didn’t know where to start. Browsing the available classes on the Coursera home page I was delighted to see “Learn to Program: The Fundamentals” would be starting right as I was looking for a new project to undertake. Even though I was interested in the topic of learning to program, I was also curious to learn more about Coursera and the learning experience first hand.

Taking place over seven weeks, the classwork was composed of interactive videos, exercises and assignments. I won’t follow the class from beginning to end, rather, I will look at each of the components and try and tease out how well they worked or did not work for teaching me (and by extension, other students) how to program.

The lecture portion of the class took place through interactive videos. Two professors from the University of Toronto took turns doing lectures. I came to appreciate these two professors a great deal and viewed them as my guide through the strange new land of programming. In this course, the programming was all done in Python (Python 3, if you’re curious). The first video explained how to install Python and Idle, its graphical interface. This video explained the process very well and I was up and running in no time. In hindsight, that first video was indicative of the quality of instruction I received for the duration of the class: clear, helpful, and concise.

I mentioned above that the videos are interactive. In most lectures the professors introduced a topic – typically a function of some kind – and gave an example of its application. After these introductions and examples, the videos paused and the student answered questions about what they learned. While the lectures were good in and of themselves, the allowing students to practice what they have just learned was indispensable. In fact, I might go so far as to say that this is one area where online learning might have a leg up over classroom learning. I found that I was able to learn and absorb quite a lot that I didn’t understand at first blush because I had the opportunity to interact with what I had just learned immidiately. While these questions were sometimes multiple choice, they usually involved forming new code based or doing simple computations. Usually they involved using doing. Through trial and error I was able to test what I had learned and have a good sense by the lecture’s end if I really understood the material or needed to go back and watch again. Much credit must be given to the instructors for choosing mini-exercises at exactly the right difficulty level. They were almost always helpful and with only a few exceptions helped me understand what I had just learned.

The mini-exercises were helpful and prepared me for the graded exercises, the second component of the classwork. These exercises were untimed, open-book quizzes comprised of multiple choice questions and solving problems that required line of code. Like their mini-brethren in found in the interactive videos these exercise questions were generally very good. They mostly served as solid reinforcement of what had just been covered in the week’s videos and gave me good practice for applying what I had learned. While I found most of these questions to be very instructive, some of them were a bit more convoluted than necessary. I second guessed myself a couple of times because I misunderstood the question. These misunderstandings could have been avoided in a class by simply raising my hand. I do not fault the content itself, necessarily, it was more that the questions were not worded in a way that made sense to me. These exercises were, on balance very good aside from the few stretches of frustration caused by unclear questions.

The final classwork component, assignments, seemed to be exercises in frustration. But I mean that in a good way.

Rather than the structured exercises, the assignments were a chance to write code from scratch. Assignment instructions gave some goals to complete and what the outcomes might look like, but it was up to me to figure out what came in between. I came to simultaneously enjoy and loathe the assignments. I really enjoyed the openness and the feeling that I was creating something from scratch. Each assignment was like a multi-part puzzle and there was a great amount of joy to be had from applying what I had learned to completing the puzzle and seeing it all come together.

However, I am no savant. I should mention here that none of this came easy to me: while the coding in this course was not difficult or advanced in any way, it does represent a very different way of thinking. I count this as a good thing, even though the frustration that comes from nearly endless trial and error became a source of reticence to approach the material near the end of the course. Probably I spent between 12-16 hours on the 3 assignments. And, for the sake of full disclosure, I never submitted the final assignment completely because I simply was not able to devote enough time to it.

Although I hate leaving things incomplete, I would not change anything about these assignments. Though challenging and sometimes frustrating  more than any other component of the class they were able to put me in the mindset of programming. They forced me to break the problem into small parts, solve each part on its own, and then look at how all the parts worked together. Really, my only complaint is that I did not have enough time to devote to the assignments.

I had a very good experience with this class and would recommend it to anyone who wants to take a very small step toward learning how to program. Obviously, this comes with some caveats. First of all, do not expect to do this casually. I had to devote some serious time and brain powers. At the beginning I was under the impression that the Coursera classes were a somewhat casual affair. While not the same commitment as what I would give to a class in university, neither was it something that I could casually pick up in a moment of free time. I had to carefully change my evening schedule to complete what I did, and even then I was still not able to get everything done. I actually count this as a point in favor of the Coursera model: the professors approached the topic on its own terms and did not cut corners for the sake of ease.

Of course, this highlights a potential problem for would-be Coursera students: it requires a high level of motivation. I did all of this because I wanted to and was excited to learn about the topic. But that was not enough to carry me through to the very end because the amount of time needed to complete everything exceeded my motivation. This is not, however, a zero-sum game. I am glad that I took this course and I fully intend to learn more about Python, though this time I will choose something that I can complete at my own pace.

In fact, that is probably my biggest criticism of the class. Because the class takes place over seven weeks, each exercise and assignment was on a tight, weekly deadline. Still, the deadlines and grading are illusory. A grade of 70% confers the student with a certificate of completion. I’m not sure that this certification translates to any tangible benefit, besides a feather in ones cap. I am not entirely clear as to why the material could not be completed and submitted at my own pace since all of the answering mechanisms are automated. Perhaps this will come in the future. I hope it does, though this is ultimately a minor complaint.

I started Coursera with reservations, and I still have them. The lack of immediate feedback, need for strong motivation, and inability to work on my own schedule are all problems that need to be addressed. However, I would absolutely recommend classes to anyone who has the interest, time, and motivation  to learn.

I don’t want to talk about the iPad too much, though. In fact, I want to talk a little about my experience with Windows 8 and how Microsoft’s latest OS incorporates sleight of hand into its operating system. This is not meant to be a review of any kind, rather, a reflection on a particular set of features that work together to give the lumbering golem that has become Windows a little bit of life.

I don’t usually go out of my for product launches but, living in Seattle, I couldn’t help but find my way to the nearest Microsoft Store October 26th to try the flagship Surface RT tablet. After wading through the crowds and waiting diligently for an empty seat to try one out, I was surprised how quickly time passed after I got the hang of the new interface. Even my daughter, not even a year old, sat on my lap with – relatively – rapt attention, enchanted by the nice colors and pretty pictures. After a few minutes of looking through the apps and seeing what was available, I found the picture app to see how the device managed photos.

I selected an album and waited. And waited some more. Maybe thirty seconds passed before an error message appeared in the upper-left hand corner telling me the picture I requested couldn’t be found. Shortly after that, I left the store. I wasn’t upset or disgusted by the advice, and I didn’t realize what had actually happened until later. I had been sucked in by the device for just a little while, brought under the illusion that my data was only a finger-tip away, simple as that.  Seeing the error exposed the trick like a street magician exposing a palmed coin to her audience.

While I don’t feel compelled to buy the device for any number of reasons I was still very impressed by the Surface RT. I admit that I am a little disappointed that Microsoft was not able to perpetuate the illusion for the entire length of my demo, if only because Apple has done just that when I sampled the device for the same amount of time. It can be done. I think that is the real reason the iPad Mini sold – roughly – eleventy-billion units since going on sale last week. Again, I digress.

In my week with Windows 8 I’ve come to see it as a system conflicted with itself. At times I forget that I’m using a laptop at all. For the first time, I don’t feel like I’m struggling against my machine to get it to do what I want. I can Snap apps to hug one side of my screen which is great for chatting and listening to music while doing other work. I can always devote as much (or as little) screen real estate to whatever program I happen to be running. I especially love the new Start Menu because it allows me to put everything I want to access quickly front and center and get back to it no matter what I’m doing. In short, I love using Windows 8.

Usually.

Sometimes, however, I have found that the illusion goes too far. Instead of giving me notifications when a program is ready to install, Windows 8 will instead stop the program and never allow me to see the notification. If an app is downloaded through Chrome and I open it from the browser in Start Menu mode, the freshly downloaded program won’t open, and so on. There seem to be many disconnects, so that when I try and do certain things I have to follow through and make sure they get done. Windows 8 does a wonderful job making me forget that I’m interacting with ’0′s and ’1′s but every time I encounter a little error like this, the illusion is broken.

I recognize that I’m picking nits. I’m not going to say ‘Microsoft better get its act together, or else!’ In truth, Windows 8 is a great product. I think people will like it, and I think it will the de facto way to interact with tablets very soon. On the other hand, I do hope that Microsoft can manage the Hecatean task of smoothing the seams, tightening the loose bolts and pulling the whole set together. They’re very close to pure magic, and that’s an act I’d like to see.

Apparently, 2012 had no use for an autumn season here in the Pacific Northwest and we jumped right over fall and landed directly into the doldrums of winter’s chilly waters. And just as the sun is spending more time below the horizon, so to are all the aspiring writers hunkering down behind their screens – to which I am no exception.

All this time away from blogging has primed the pump tapping directly into my reservoir of creative juices, the outcome of which I hope will be interesting or useful.

Planned posts in the near future will explore my forays into online education; some observations on learning languages – both interpersonal and otherwise; and a little reflection on the meaning of social responsibility in our increasingly-connected society.

I’ll be returning to my spring schedule of one post per week, probably on Thursdays, or Thursday and any day something pops up that just can’t wait.

Hope to see you around!

I love that they have given a platform for creators to get funding directly from their audience. It is a valuable service, and I hope to see many more successful, innovate projects find their way into our homes because of what Kickstarter does. I love what Kickstarter _represents_.

I hate Kickstarter because my RSS feed is being clogged with stories about Kickstarter projects. I recognize this is mostly due to the mostly-new nature of the service, but there seem to be only two stories about Kickstarter projects. The first story is about about how much much money _x_ project has raised in _y_ time. The bottom line is always “a lot” and “not very much.” The second story is about how revolutionary/innovative/disruptive – take your pick of salacious buzzword – said project will be and why I should pay attention.

Of course, I don’t blame Kickstarter for the media’s latest darling. Nor do I blame editorial staff for breathlessly trumpeting the latest hotness that catches the eye of the kickstarting masses. And usually I read the story about the newest project, say ‘oh, neat’ and move along.

I say this because I’m going to write about a Kickstarter project and feel somewhat compelled to explain myself.

Yesterday, Ouya was unveiled on Kickstarter. You can see the _x_ money in _y_ time is very impressive. If you didn’t read the details, Ouya is an open gaming console that runs on Android 4.0. All games released on Ouya must have some free element, Ouya will take 30% of the cut, and each console is a software development kit (SDK). The console will be sold for $99.

Like Kickstarter itself, I love the idea behind this but I hardly find myself getting too excited. I hear a lot about how this is going to ‘change everything’ and ‘be so disruptive.’ This quote from Techdirt sums up the general excitement rather nicely:

“We have seen some disruption [in console gaming] over the years, the Wii being a primary one. It showed the gaming world that the graphical arms race of previous console generations was not as important as innovation in the way people play games. Another disruption happened because of Facebook and mobile gaming. These platforms brought with them the proliferation of a free-to-play business model for gaming. The idea that people could play games for free and then pay money later was something never tried since shareware fell out of favor. These little pockets of disruption have shown that there is a market for gaming outside the typical retail console and PC arena.”

I don’t disagree that the Wii and Facebook have proved disruptive to gaming. I do, however, wonder how the two are at all related to the Ouya.

The Wii changed the gaming scene and led the way in console sales because it provided a unique experience that anyone could enjoy. I remember the first time I saw Wii Sports: it looked silly as all get out, but the idea that I could really control what was happening on screen looked easy, fun and engaging. Wash, rinse and repeat with the Kinect. The motion technology – hated as it may be by the gaming community at large – proved to be an engaging way to involve the masses.

Likewise, Zynga found an audience in Facebook by making games that were easy to play while/after catching up with your friends. These games operate more on a social, rather than purely interactive, level and have provided a new channel for developers.

Does the Ouya do either of those things? I don’t see how, at least not yet. The Wii gave mass audiences party games that could be enjoyed with a group of friends and were easy to access. Will the Ouya be able to do this in a way that the Wii or the Kinect  doesn’t already? Likewise, will Ouya make games that are easy to play and provide a social element? If so, will these game be any more compelling than the offerings on Facebook?

I don’t see that Ouya offers anything unique that cannot be found on PC, Wii, Kinect or even XBLA. I like the idea that the console thinks developer first, but I wonder if we’ll ever see any real innovation come to the console if the audiences is never there to begin with. Of course I could make a game, sell it on Steam, XBLA and Ouya to make sure I find an audience, but then, why would I bother with an Ouya if I can play the same games on the PC? It’s a catch-22.

Maybe the Ouya will come out of the gate with a dozen must-play games that are cheap, accessible and irresistible. I have a sneaking suspicion, however, Ouya will churn out a couple of charming indie platformers rather than revolutionize the industry.

If you’re coming here from ThinkProgress, here are  some old posts you may be interested in reading.