Central Perk

luni, 22 iulie 2013

Damn Cool Pics

Japan launches world's first 'snail facial' [Video]
Funny Tip Jars
The Best Comic Con Costumes of 2013
Girls of Camp Bisco 2013
How to Make Coffee and Share Fun Coffee Tips Like a Pro [Infographic]

Japan launches world's first 'snail facial' [Video]

Posted: 22 Jul 2013 12:54 PM PDT

Japan just launched the snail facial, where organic snails shipped in from Switzerland are allowed to roam the open fields of your face, leaving a slime trail of miraculous healing in their wake.

Check it out as Telegraph reporter Danielle Demetriou gives it a try.

Funny Tip Jars

Posted: 22 Jul 2013 12:39 PM PDT

Tip jars that will make you leave some cash.

The Best Comic Con Costumes of 2013

Posted: 22 Jul 2013 10:25 AM PDT

Girls of Camp Bisco 2013

Posted: 22 Jul 2013 08:14 AM PDT

Camp Bisco is an outdoor music festival. It's held at the beautiful Indian Lookout Country Club, near Albany, NY. Here are the hottest girls of Camp Bisco 2013.

How to Make Coffee and Share Fun Coffee Tips Like a Pro [Infographic]

Posted: 22 Jul 2013 07:31 AM PDT

Improve your coffee knowledge and fatten your pockets with lots of frugal ways to enjoy a cup of coffee in the comforts of your home. Learn how to brew and prepare your favorite coffee blends and pick up perfect coffee pairings in this infographic from FinancesOnline.com.

Click on Image to Enlarge.

How to Make Coffee: Learn from Professionals How to Serve the Perfect Cup

Courtesy of: financesonline

Seth's Blog : Q&A: The writing process

Q&A: The writing process

The third book, as our series continues, is: Survival is Not Enough.

Andy Levitt and others wrote in to ask about my writing process. Many authors have one. Erle Stanley Gardner, one of the most successful authors of all time, dictacted each Perry Mason book to his secretary, who wrote them out. It took 21 days for each book, and he didn't even need to edit them.

I confess to not having a process. Some books, like The Dip, were created Gardner-style (without the secretary part). I wrote Ideavirus in less than ten days. I might think about a topic for months or years, but then, whoosh, there's a book.

That's not what happened with this book. I grew up with science fiction, and one of the elements I like about the best novels is the way the author establishes a few assumptions about the way of the world and then explores the implications of those assumptions. Dune is a fine example of this, as are Asimov's Robot novels.

After writing Unleashing the Ideavirus, I was reading a lot of books about memetics, evolution and evolutionary biology. A few (like The Red Queen and Darwin's Dangerous Idea) were profound in their eloquence and implications. It seemed to me that combining memetics (the analysis of the evolution and spread of ideas) with modern thinking about evolution could give us new insight into how organizations work.

And so I headed down the rabbit hole. Eight hours a day for a year. I read hundreds of books, filled notebooks with ideas and wrote more than 600 pages, less than half of which I ended up using. The result is certainly the book I've worked hardest on, and perhaps not coincidentally, the book that sold the fewest copies. So few that my publisher took the unusual step of firing me, showing no interest whatever in my next book, Purple Cow.

There were probably two reasons that Survival didn't do very well. The first is that it came out right after 9/11, when much of the nation was grieving. The second: science fiction novels lend themselves to complexity, new vocabulary and flights of theory. Popular business books, not so much.

At one level, every author writes for himself. I'm proud of my process here, of how hard I was able to push on this book and how much I learned doing it. On the other hand, we write for our readers, and my readers told me that more concrete examples and fewer footnotes were the way to go if I was intent on starting conversations and fostering positive change.

The goal in blogging/business/inspiring non-fiction is to share a truth, or at least a truth as the writer sees it. To not just share it, but to spread it and to cause change to happen. You can do that in at least three ways: with research (your own or reporting on others), by building and describing conceptual structures, or with stories that resonate.

Both Linchpin and Icarus found me returning to a more heavily-researched approach to writing. It's exhausting, but the work is its own reward. The process is a choice, though. You can write without becoming a monk, by bringing your voice to those that want to hear it.

The biggest takeaway for anyone seeking to write is this: don't go looking for the way other authors do their work. You won't find many who are consistent enough to copy, and there are enough variations in approach that it's obvious that it's not like hitting home runs or swinging a golf club. There isn't a standard approach, there's only what works for you (and what doesn't).

In the words my late friend Isaac Asimov shared with Carl Sagan, "You are my idea of a good writer because you have an unmannered style, and when I read what you write, I hear you talking."

The process advice that makes sense to me is to write. Constantly. At length. Often. Don't publish everything you write, but the more you write, the more you have to choose from.

• Email to a friend •

You're Going to Want to Watch This Speech

Featured

You're Going to Want to Watch This Speech

Eight years ago, President Obama spoke at Knox College to explain his economic vision for the country -- one which says that America is at its best when everyone has the opportunity to succeed.

This Wednesday, almost five years after the financial crisis fueled a devastating recession, the President will return to Knox College to kick off a series of speeches that will lay out the goals that will guide his administration through the rest of his time at the White House.

Watch a special preview of the President's remarks, then share this email with your friends and family.

The SEO's Guide to Building a Great Mobile Site

Posted: 21 Jul 2013 07:34 PM PDT

Posted by Kristina Kledzik

If you're a regular reader of the Moz blog, chances are you've heard about the importance of investing in mobile. You've already formed an opinion on whether or not you'd like your employers/clients to build a responsive site or keep a separate mobile site, and you've started hinting that great mobile sites are worth the investment. The problem is, how can you make that happen?

In my experience as an SEO consultant, in order to effect change, you have to:

Convince key players that change is important
Know enough about the problem, the site, and the available solutions to recommend the best strategy
Be an active player in the implementation, making sure that the solution is implemented properly, and that the change doesn't create any new SEO problems

Using that framework, in order to get a mobile site built, you have to explain the necessity of creating a solid mobile site, investigate the options of responsive versus separate mobile sites (or a combination of the two), and guide the build and implementation of the mobile site. This is your guide to making that happen.

Why you need to invest in mobile

Mobile isn't a small amount of internet traffic anymore:

Source: http://www.slideshare.net/kleinerperkins/kpcb-internet-trends-2013

Mobile internet usage has grown dramatically in the past few years, and as cell phones and data plans get cheaper, mobile visitors will become more crucial to online success. It's easy for site owners to push aside the 10% of visits that were coming from mobile last year, but what about the end of 2013, when 20% of internet traffic is projected to be mobile?

(Also, do you notice how there's a spike in mobile internet usage every year in December? Aim for a November roll out of your new mobile site to make sure that it's up and ready for the influx of mobile visitors you'll get after the 25th. Bonus points for devising a mobile-specific marketing strategy in early January.)

All right, so a lot of people are using their phone to go online. But how does that translate into conversions?

For ecommerce

There has been a lot of discussion about mobile conversions, mostly because:

It's new, so customers haven't adjusted to how they're going to use their new mobile devices yet
It's new, so companies haven't built sites that visitors want to buy from yet
New companies who are putting a lot of emphasis are getting amazing results, like Gilt and Fab, but larger online retailers, like Amazon, aren't selling much on mobile, even if they have great mobile sites.

According to Google, 35% of mobile visitors in 2012 have made a purchase on a smartphone. Keep in mind that only two thirds of all internet users have made online purchases, meaning that mobile visitors are really only about half as likely to make a purchase as a desktop visitor (and these stats back that up). And by "half," I mean that-glass-is-half-full: mobile visitors are half as likely to buy online as desktop users already, and as the web becomes more mobile-friendly and people get more used to relying on their phones for purchases, that number is only going to increase.

For offline companies

What if you're working for a company that doesn't sell its products online? That almost makes mobile more important. 70% of shoppers used a mobile phone while shopping during the 2012 holiday season, and 62% of those shoppers looked at the store's site or app. Giving visitors a great user experience can actually increase offline sales. If you're working for an offline retailer, consider building a site that will aid in-store sales, offering things like coupons, reviews of in store items, and more product details.

For informational sites

Last, many companies that provide articles and content rather than products think that visitors wouldn't want to spend the time reading their long form content on a mobile device, assuming that mobile visitors only read sites "on the go." But The New York Times put the effort into creating great mobile sites, and now one third of its traffic is coming from mobile devices. Mobile visitors will be able to read your content sitting on the bus, riding up elevators, and waiting in store lines.

Convinced yet?

If not, look through the masses of statistics on Karen McGrane's State of the Mobile Web - Sources post and find what speaks to your situation/site. There's just too much information out there for some of it not to be pertinent to you.

Once you've put together an epic presentation on the importance of a mobile site and convinced the right people, they're going to need some guidance planning the new mobile site.

Too many options

Choosing how to build your mobile site can be confusing and stressful, mostly because there are so many different options. You could build a separate site, with separate URLs. You could build a separate site that is served in place of the main site when a mobile visitor tries to access the page. You could build a separate site that is a (smaller) mirror image of the main site, or you could build a mobile site that is completely different. Or, of course, you could build a responsive site.

The reason there are so many options, and therefore too many choices, is that you're trying to answer two very separate questions with one answer:

What content do you want to offer to your mobile customers, and
How do you serve that content?

Content

There are really only two ways you can build your mobile site: Either it has the same content as your main site, or it has different content.

Before you worry about the technology, or what exactly it will look like, you have to decide what your goals are for the mobile site. Are they the same as your primary site, or are you focusing on different conversions? Or (and this is an acceptable answer), are you considering building/improving your mobile site because the statistics at the beginning of this post freaked you out?

The key here is to figure out if visitors' goals on the main site should be the same on the mobile version of the site. This is partially determined by what you, as the business, want your visitors to do, and partially by what they actually want to do. You should determine your business goals internally, but use your web analytics to see what mobile visitors are doing on your current site.

If you and your customers want the same things from the mobile site that you do from the primary site, you probably want to build a mobile site with content that's identical to your primary site, unless you have the time and desire to regularly modify the mobile version. For example, SEOs who want to tweak their mobile sites so that they target slightly different search engine queries and browsing behaviors will want to build a mobile site that can be independently modified.

Technology

Now that you've decided what content you want on your site, you can start to look at how to make that come to life.

Responsive

If you decided that you want to build a mobile site that has identical (or near-identical) content to the main site, you may want to consider building a responsive site. Some of the pros of a responsive design are:

Once you've built responsive templates, you don't have to update both the main and the mobile sites separately.
When you only have one version of content, and you know that the mobile version will show up on a tiny screen, you may find yourself editing your content better, which is good for your primary site as well.
Links that point to your desktop site will also point to your mobile site, making it strong even though it's new.
Your site will amaze visitors (other SEOs/web designers looking for examples for their blog posts) as they change the browser size.

Resistance to responsive sites

"Building a responsive site would take too long/cost too much, because it would involve rebuilding the main site as well."

To save money or spread the costs out over time, you can either build a separate mobile site, roll out the responsive site slowly, or do a combination of both.

To "roll out the responsive site," identify the pages on your site with the most traffic, and make them responsive, doing as much as you can in increments until the entire site is responsive. A benefit of this is that you'll get feedback from customers as little chunks of the site become responsive, meaning that the problems won't affect the entire site.

If you decide to just build a separate but identical site, use the same URLs for your mobile sites, but have your servers deliver the mobile version of the site to mobile devices (this is called dynamic serving). That way, you can start working on rolling out responsive design later and don't have to deal with broken URLs.

"The content on my site takes too long to load on a mobile device."

There are a few different types of content, so I have a few answers to this:

Text actually doesn't take that long to load, and research shows that mobile visitors are actually quite willing to scroll through long pieces of content. Though, if you really want to hack away at the text that's on your desktop site, why not just hack away at it on the desktop version of your site as well?
Images can be served dynamically so that mobile devices are offered small, low-resolution pictures while larger devices get higher quality.
Complicated JavaScript/CSS can usually be simplified without giving up too much of their functionality.
Flash just shouldn't be on your site at all anymore. Just let that technology go, everyone, we have HTML5 now.

Separate mobile sites

If, on the other hand, you've decided to create different content for your mobile visitors, you'll want to go with a separate site. Pros of separate sites are:

There are no limitations from the main site, meaning:
- The site can be completely different, targeting mobile users' needs more directly.
- The site can be largely the same, but tweaked to target mobile users' keywords and mobile search engine results.
The main site doesn't have to be redesigned at all.
The initial build will be easier, since you don't have to set up CSS media queries to lay out.
If there is a lot of bureaucracy around the main site, you may have more flexibility to test new ideas on the mobile site, which you can roll into the main site if they're proven beneficial.

Resistance to separate sites

The only real resistance to separate sites is the idea that responsive sites are better.

The cool thing is, building an awesome separate mobile site does not mean that you've passed by the opportunity for responsive, if that becomes the big thing. Mobile First, by Luke Wroblewski, theorizes that building a responsive site from a mobile site is actually easier, and in the end, lays a better foundation for a great responsive site.

Make it happen

I'm not a designer or a developer. If you are both, congratulations, you're awesome. Go read Responsive Web Design to build your new responsive site, or just start writing some HTML for your new mobile site.

If you're an internet marketer like me, check out the guide that Bridget Randolph and I wrote on designing, helping with development, and tracking mobile sites: http://www.distilled.net/training/mobile-seo-guide/

Good luck!

Getting a great mobile site built is still an uphill battle, but it's definitely worth it. For those of you that have built great mobile sites already, anything to add? For those of you that haven't, any questions I didn't cover?

Sign up for The Moz Top 10, a semimonthly mailer updating you on the top ten hottest pieces of SEO news, tips, and rad links uncovered by the Moz team. Think of it as your exclusive digest of stuff you don't have time to hunt down but want to read!

Seth's Blog : Fake is a fairly new idea (and a not very good one)

Fake is a fairly new idea (and a not very good one)

When you look people in the eye, you own the results. You're not wearing a mask, you can't easily leave town, this is your store, your house, your car, your place at the front of the classroom. When you can look people in the eye, you're doing something a million years old.

When our ancestors moved around exclusively on foot, it was unlikely that they ever traveled more than a few dozen miles from home. People were wary of strangers, and that was okay, because there weren't many. Reputation was truly a matter of life and death.

On the shiny, perfect, digital landscape of CGI movies and the internet, it's different. No one really died in the Matrix movies. The comics came to life (for a while, anyway). We don't mourn for the make-believe actors demolished by make-believe machines. Because it's not real. And on the internet, it's so easy to perceive that customer or that partner or that icon as the 'other', certainly not someone we need to look in the eye. We can leave a trail of wreckage without much thought, especially if we're anonymous.

So, when the conversation gets tough, we stop checking back on it. When we want to hide behind an alias or the asynchronous nature of email, we do. We check out.

Worse, when we want to deceive or lash out, it's easy to do. Hey, there's always someone else we can start over with, relationships and even reputations are disposable. We don't have to look you in the eye, it's dark in here, and we're wearing a mask.

Our experiment in fake has some really significant consequences. It turns strangers into actors on a screen, and sometimes we help them, but often, we become inured to their reality, and treat them with a callousness and indifference we'd never use in our village.

One philosophy is caveat emptor. Assume the worst. Assume you will be ignored or ripped off or disappointed. Your mileage may vary.

Another is carpe diem. Seize the moment to connect, to keep promises and most of all, to figure out how to look people in the eye or not promise you will.

Do we really need to add another layer of fake?

• Email to a friend •

luni, 22 iulie 2013

Damn Cool Pics

Damn Cool Pics

Seth's Blog : Q&A: The writing process

Q&A: The writing process

More Recent Articles

You're Going to Want to Watch This Speech

The SEO's Guide to Building a Great Mobile Site

The SEO's Guide to Building a Great Mobile Site