something in the way

There's an old saying: "It took me ten years to be an overnight success." We've been waiting for web fonts for at least a decade, and 2010 will finally be the year that web fonts go mainstream.

This is in no small part to the work both Typekit and Google have been doing. Today they both announced some very cool things in this area.

First up, Google announced that they are releasing high quality open source fonts in the Google Font Directory. Since these are open source you can even download the original font files yourself at the font code.google.com project.

Next, Google has made it very easy to include these fonts into your page using the new Google Font API. To use a font you simply drop some HTML into your page similar to the following, specifying the font you want to use:

Doesn't get simpler than that. The new API does alot of things for you behind the scenes:

Google’s serving infrastructure takes care of converting the font into a format compatible with any modern browser (including Internet Explorer 6 and up), sends just the styles and weights you select, and the font files and CSS are tuned and optimized for web serving. For example, cache headers are set to maximize the likelihood that the fonts will be served from the browser’s cache with no need for a network roundtrip, even when the same font is linked from different websites.

These fonts also work well with CSS3 and HTML5 styling, including drop shadows, rotation, etc. In addition, selecting these fonts in your CSS works just the same as for locally installed fonts, facilitating clean separation of content and presentation.

On a related front, Typekit and Google announced a new Web Font Loader that smooths over many of the differences around loading web fonts on a page:

The WebFont Loader puts the developer in control of how web fonts are handled by various browsers. The API fires JavaScript events at certain points, for example when the web font completes downloading. With these events, developers can control how web fonts behave on a site so that they download consistently across all browsers. In addition, developers can set the fallback font's size to more closely match the web font, so content doesn't reflow after loading.

Furthermore, the WebFont Loader is designed to make it easy to switch between different providers of web fonts, including Google, Typekit, and others. The code is modular, and we expect to add modules for other major web font providers in coming weeks.

It's great to see Typekit involved in this; they are a real pioneer in this area and have helped make fonts on the web a reality.

To see all these pieces together navigate over to Smashing Magazine which relaunched their site using these technologies.

Congrats to the Google Web Fonts and Themes team, including Raph Levien, Jeremie Lenfant-Engelmann, Marc Tobias Kunisch, Meslissa Louie, and David Kuettel.

[Disclosure: I work for Google and know the Web Fonts team. However, even if I didn't, I would still be excited about this since I've been waiting for web fonts to happen since the 90s!]

Google has decided to put weight behind WebGL and stop actively developing O3D as a plugin, rather they will make O3D a Javascript library on top of WebGL. This will focus the 3D plugin development efforts from Google into just WebGL on top of the OpenGL ES 2 spec, which in turn runs in the html5 <canvas> tag.

WebGL is pretty exciting offering browser based OpenGL and hardware rendered graphics. When this becomes mainstream this will change up gaming and interactive on the web immensely. Unity 3D and Flash 3d engines add lots of immersive environments and WebGL will be just as exciting, if all browsers adopt it (canvas/webgl).

At Google, we’re deeply committed to implementing and advancing standards, so as of today, the O3D project is changing direction, evolving from its current plug-in implementation into a JavaScript library that runs on top of WebGL. Users and developers will still be able to download the O3D plug-in and source code for at least one year, but other than a maintenance release, we plan to stop developing O3D as a plug-in and focus on improving WebGL and O3D as a JavaScript library.

About WebGL

WebGL is a cross-platform, royalty-free web standard for a low-level 3D graphics API based on OpenGL ES 2.0, exposed through the HTML5 Canvas element as Document Object Model interfaces. Developers familiar with OpenGL ES 2.0 will recognize WebGL as a Shader-based API using GLSL, with constructs that are semantically similar to those of the underlying OpenGL ES 2.0 API. It stays very close to the OpenGL ES 2.0 specification, with some concessions made for what developers expect out of memory-managed languages such as JavaScript.

WebGL brings plugin-free 3D to the web, implemented right into the browser. Major browser vendors Apple (Safari), Google (Chrome), Mozilla (Firefox), and Opera (Opera) are members of the WebGL Working Group. “It feels like, someone’s missin-ing”

First there were rumors about Apple using bing as their official search provider. Then there was the rant by Steve Job’s calling Google motto bs. Then Google struck back adding multi touch to the Nexus One, now this.

An iPhone developer has received a letter from Apple stating that it can not use the word “Android” in their app. In fact Apple wants to remove that word from all its apps in the app store. Idiot moves like this is the prime reason more and more people are choosing Android and this will only lead to the demise of the iPhone. Nobody wants to be under a dictatorship and that is what Apple has been. Here is a copy of the letter.

“Dear Flash of Genius, LLC,
Thank you for submitting Flash of Genius: SAT Vocab 2.2 to the App Store. During our review of your application, we found that your application contains inappropriate or irrelevant platform information in the Application Description and/or Release Notes sections.
Providing future platform compatibility plans or other general platform references are not relevant in the context of the iPhone App Store. While your application has not been rejected, it would be appropriate to remove “Finalist in Google’s Android Developer’s Challenge!” from the Application Description.
Please log into iTunes Connect to make appropriate changes to the Application Description now to avoid an interruption in the availability of Flash of Genius: SAT Vocab 2.2 on the iPhone App Store.
Regards,
iPhone Developer Program”

[via eurodroid]

Related posts:

• Android vs iPhone: Slug It Out
• Top Android dev says Android Market sales are not good
• Michael Dell Shows Off The Upcoming Dell Mini 5

Google says it's taking "a new approach to China" and will stop censoring search results there, even if it means they have to shut down Google.cn and their China offices. The announcement is a huge deal, and it set off some fantastic insta-commentary from tech writers on Twitter. My favorite, shown above, is courtesy of Joel Johnson. More inside.

Most people's reactions were emotional, proud, celebratory:

Others dug deeper or cracked jokes.

From a friend who shall remain nameless because her/his tweets are protected:

From an obvious Microsoft-lover:

Chinese tech writer Jacqui Cheng had the most insightful bits of the bunch. So you don't have to read her tweets backward, she said:

# The Google/China thing is so much bigger than Google just deciding to stop censoring. That's small beans compared to the big picture.
# Basically, Google thinks the Chinese gov could be behind these attacks, attempting to use Google as a pawn to get info on detractors...
# ...and is saying so without actually saying so.
# The wording is very careful and calculated in that sense. Not to mention that others have suspected the same for a long time.

Finally, Cheng's prediction on how this will play out:

# China will tell Google to suck it and Google will pull out, and America will forget all about it in a week.

If you want more than 140 characters, here's The New York Times' first take on the news.

Google’s open-source Android mobile platform runs on Java. Processing, the elegant coding language for visualization, art, and media, is built in Java. The marriage of the two, therefore, is one we’ve long been anticipating. Processing’s ability to focus on lightweight, portable implementation is a perfect match for the demands of mobile development. For artists and visualists wanting to make handheld devices and tablets more expressive, I have good news: it’s coming. While not fully implemented or ready for widespread testing yet, Processing is in active development on the platform.

Ben Fry, co-creator of Processing, has been hard at work making Processing run on Android. Interestingly, in some ways Android itself vindicates the direction Processing charted years ago. Google made their platform work based on open-source development tools. They removed parts of the Java platform that would have overwhelmed the limited processing power of handhelds – even as a handful of purist Java developers cried foul. Graphics focuses on lightweight 2D and OpenGL drawing output, much in the same way that Processing strips Java to its bare essentials.

Best of all, doing Processing development for Android promises the same streamlined, sketchbook-like production flow that Processing does on desktop. To create Android apps, you simply set Processing to “Android mode.” (Right now, you have to point to Google’s SDK, but that happens only once and may be removed in future versions.) Hit run, and your sketch launches in the Emulator. Plug in an Android device via USB, and it’ll run on your device. Soon, you should have one-click-export of apps in the way that you do Processing desktop apps.

This also suggests some great possibilities for cheap, handheld devices, installations, and reliable portable devices for visual performance. Sure, right now a lot of Android-powered devices require a phone contract and don’t output video, but a lot of devices slated for later this year are media devices with video output and tablets, too.

Processing for Android is an early work-in-progress. If you’re thinking about playing with it and you don’t know what you’re doing, or you have little patience for bugs and wrinkles, you should wait until the waters grow safer. Right now, the team working on testing the port is intended to be limited, although as someone testing it myself, I can say it’s already a lot of fun and holds a lot of promise for the future. OpenGL support is currently not available, but it’s coming – and I’ll say again, if you want to know what Processing’s 3D future looks like, check out the superb GLGraphics library. Anyone who thinks Processing can’t be fast, or do intensive GPU work, or mix HD video (okay, not on Android, but on desktop at least), check out this library. OpenCL should also be possible soon.

http://android.processing.org/

BIG, BIG disclaimers! Please don’t go testing Processing on Android assuming it’ll work out of the box – for the brave ONLY, at least for now. (That should change very, very soon, but I couldn’t keep the news under my hat any longer.) As the disclaimer says (hilariously):

Do not use this code while operating heavy equipment. Do not rely on this code for thesis or diploma work, as you will not graduate. Do not use this code if you’re prone to whining about incomplete software that you download for free.

A number of us have already begun talking about the possibility of adding libraries to connect Processing’s capabilities to Google’s own APIs for the phone, SMS, sensors, and so on. Sound and synthesis via external libraries should also be possible.

I think Processing for Android is the perfect complement to openFrameworks for native code on mobile platforms. Right now, OF has already been used for terrific work on the iPhone. It’s not quite as user-friendly as Processing for Android for a number of reasons, but it has Processing-derived syntax, aesthetics, and philosophy, and it’s also free and open. For a superb guide to developing on the iPhone with OF, plus some links:

http://www.openframeworks.cc/setup/iphone

OF does not appear to be a practical solution for Android development, not least because Android requires apps to be distributed as Java, and uses Java to talk to all the native APIs. But it’s a good option for some of these other devices, and you can run the two alongside one another in Eclipse if you like, more advanced users.

With OF on the iPhone (and presumably other native platforms in future – Nokia N900, anyone?), and Processing for Android, plus tools like Pd and SuperCollider for synthesis (more on that soon), there’s no reason not to go completely open with portable interactive art on mobile devices.

Despite placing #1 on BusinessWeek’s annual ranking of “The Top 25 Ideal Employers” for the third year in a row, Google is facing its fair share of talent challenges. At 22,000 employees, it can no longer provide the start-up appeal it once did to its entreprenurial work force. Over the past few months, industry analysts and recruiters alike have watched as a number of Google employees have left the company to join other hot startups, including Facebook and Twitter. Other Google employees have gone on to start ventures of their own, some more successful than others.

So what do you do when your talent starts walking out the door?

Well, if you’re Google, you create an an algorithm.

As the Wall Street Journal recently pointed out, Google has created an algorithm to predict which employees are likely to leave the company, often times before the employee knows him or herself.

As the WSJ explains:

“The Internet search giant recently began crunching data from employee reviews and promotion and pay histories in a mathematical formula Google says can identify which of its 20,000 employees are most likely to quit.

Google officials are reluctant to share details of the formula, which is still being tested. The inputs include information from surveys and peer reviews, and Google says the algorithm already has identified employees who felt underused, a key complaint among those who contemplate leaving.”

From a managerial perspective, this insight could be quite useful depending on how those inputs are structured. It’s interesting to think about “employee engagement” as a key performance indicator, or an average “likely to leave” rating which could give a manager a close-to-real-time employee morale index.

In addition, could managers monitor the changes in employee morale as a result of implementing policy changes? For example, did a certain training program leave employees feeling more engaged over a certain time period?

If bundled with the latest social network analysis software , a manager might be able to visually see social clusters where morale was low, and potentially isolate the issue to the leader or some other characteristic specific to that group of employees.

Not everyone shares my optimistic view of the potential uses of such data. Some of the comments on the article:

ZAC HINKEL wrote: This reminds me of the movie ‘Minority Report.’ Just because you can, doesn’t mean you should.

Mark Shallcross wrote: There’s a precious quote buried in there: “… and some found the company’s human-resources programs too impersonal.” Now, why would they think that?

James Curry wrote: This very action is indicative of why Google is shedding talent. Math cannot manage human beings.

CHRIS GROTHKOPP wrote: “You will now be given your mathematically appropriate level of positive feedback today to keep your departure quotient in the acceptable variance range.”

What do you think? Is this an effective use of data? Will it help Google solve the ‘talent exodus’?

Wish granted!

Think 3D in the browser will never catch on? Think again. The folks at Google Labs have built an incredible-looking 3D API called O3D. It does just about everything you want, and then some:

• It’s multi-platform: Mac + Windows + Linux.
• It can render to both OpenGL and DirectX render pipelines.
• You can write your own vertex and pixel shaders. You have to use O3D’s own language for doing this, but that actually enhances compatibility, as frustrated shader coders may already know. (See the FAQ)
• It’s a scene graph, so managing complex 3D scenes isn’t a chore.
• It has powerful built-in functions like viewports and pickers (plus custom pickers), so you can actually get something up and running in a reasonable time.
• It has an import workflow with COLLADA, an open standard for 3D assets (and which, incidentally, has support in Google’s own SketchUp).
• You code in JavaScript, using the powerful V8 engine (developed for Chrome).
• Gears lets you run offline.

There are already some complaints about “another standard,” but to me, putting together a whole package here and employing other, lower-level standards (JavaScript, COLLADA, OpenGL, DirectX) makes a lot of sense.

http://code.google.com/apis/o3d/

I expect the folks working on Java and JavaFX are busy thinking about the fact that Sun just got bought by Oracle – something I’m hopeful, at least, ensures Sun’s future and is ultimately a good thing. But I hope someone on those teams is starting to get the message: 3D isn’t just something that’d be “nice to have.” It’s essential. And while even most developers likely don’t have a clue about things like custom shaders, having access to customize the graphics pipeline is likewise something ultimately benefits all developers – even if they just wind up relying on someone else’s code. I really do hope this is a priority with the coming development of Java and JavaFX, which could have the power to do these sorts of things. (Heck, Java could even benefit from the code Google just posted.)

On the proprietary side, this to me is a big blow to Microsoft’s WPF and Silverlight and Adobe’s Director. Unlike those products, O3D looks simple, powerful, flexible, open source, and directly programmable with JavaScript.

That’s not to say there aren’t some questions here – and the Java/JavaFX comparison is especially relevant:

• Another plug-in: You do have to install a plug-in to work with O3D, something that actually isn’t necessary with JavaFX (when it finally does 3D) or right now with JOGL and Java3D.
• Mobile, or just desktop? My big question I have is what this means for mobile. I’d love to have O3D work with OpenGL ES on, say, Google’s own Android platform.
• Not Just JavaScript? It would be nice if eventually you could use other languages like Java to program O3D.
• Sound? Oh, yeah, that. 3D sound is an ideal complement to this sort of scene, and the browser may be a bit constrained in that respect. I’m curious whether O3D might eventually include an audio API. (And yes, that’s where something like Director is still unparalleled.)
• Making it actually work: Okay, there’s also the fact that I haven’t successfully installed it just yet. Working on that.

(I’ll try to get answers to those questions.)

Oh yeah, and then there are details like the necessity to write your own custom shaders just to add more than one light to a scene – I think this will initially appeal only to folks with some real 3D experience.

But am I excited? Ohhhhh, yes, indeed. O3D itself looks fantastic, and I think this is a sign that 3D times ahead are going to be really fantastic.

And as long as you have the plug-in working and a browser in full-screen mode, you could literally set up an O3D project as a performance / installation tool. O3D visualists? Absolutely. Enjoy.

Right now the top stories on Techmeme revolve around a new piece in The Times of London that focuses on The Environmental Impact of Google Searches. In it, physicist Alex Wissner-Gross (a star MIT graduate who is now at Harvard) posits that a single Google search generates 7g of CO2, versus around 15g for a tea kettle – something he calls a “definite environmental impact.”

That sounds bad, right?

There’s no doubt that Google consumes a massive amount of energy, with hundreds of millions of searches conducted every day and data centers scattered across the globe. But let’s try to shed a little perspective on things.

A single book runs around 2,500 grams of CO2, or more than 350 times a Google search. By some estimates, a single cheeseburger has a carbon footprint of around 3,600 grams – over 500 times larger than a Google search. Granted, meat in general has a notoriously large carbon footprint, but if you’re genuinely concerned about your environmental impact then try cutting a burger from your diet every week and search guilt-free (you may even lose a few pounds).

And isn’t it possible that Google may actually be helping the environment in some ways? I can’t count how many times I’ve been able to use Google in lieu of driving to the library to look up a fact (each car trip would have had carbon costs orders of magnitude larger than that Google search). I’ve used Google Transit dozens of times to figure out train and bus schedules so that I wouldn’t have to drive my car. And surely the search engine has helped countless green-minded folk find a website where they could purchase carbon credits.

My issue with the article isn’t that it is factually incorrect – it’s that it paints Google as a malevolent force shrouded in secrecy, and that every time you use it (or one of the other mentioned companies like Twitter), you’re adding to the problem. In a word, it’s alarmist. Google could probably become more energy efficient, but I fear that articles like this will lead people to shy away from the Internet. Unlike gas guzzling SUVs, the web helps connect and enrich humanity. By all means encourage web companies to become as carbon neutral as possible, but don’t make energy-conscious consumers afraid of their browsers.

And finally, one last bit that is more concerned with the journalistic practices of The Times than Google. Alex Wissner-Gross co-founded an interesting startup called CO2Stats that we’ve covered a few times in the past (it was also a finalist in The Crunchies). The site helps websites stay as green as possible by offering carbon credits as well as badges to help promote the cause. The Times article only mentions the site in passing, and fails to acknowledge that CO2Stats is a company that earns money, not just an informative website. I sincerely doubt there is anything sinister going on, but such a major potential source of bias seems worthy of more than just a mention.

Update: Google has responded to The Times article, stating that a single search is actually equivalent to a mere 0.2 grams of CO2. The blog post also details some of Google’s efforts to further green technology as well as the energy efficiency of its own data centers.

Crunch Network: CrunchGear drool over the sexiest new gadgets and hardware.