Doc Searls got me thinking about presentation software which has become a current topic with Apple's new Keynote software. PowerPoint dominates presentation software and I really hate it. Maybe that's not completely fair. I hate PowerPoint in the same way that I hate Flash...not so much the software itself, but how it's used. With most applications there is a way that you are supposed to use them...it's how they're designed. You can work with them in a different way, but you're going against the grain. PowerPoint seems to tend toward mediocrity in the direction that it pushes people.
Derek K. Miller explains "Why PowerPoint is like a sauna in a Saab" and Doc's article "It's the Story, Stupid" should be read before anyone prepares a presentation.
Years ago I had to make PowerPoint presentations for other people as part of my job. On the 7100AV that I used it was slow and an incredible memory hog. I didn't help it a lot since I'd usually make up the shows in Photoshop as a series of images and bring them in. I much preferred doing things like that using Director and later Flash. But one of the hidden, but very useful features of Adobe's Acrobat reader is the full-screen mode that turns a PDF file into a presentation. I've done some presentations that way.
The last presentation that I gave was supported with slides that I created in Photoshop and then assembled with QuickTime Pro as a series of stills. It worked well.
Now when I'm writing something more structred I'll start in OmniOutliner which is probably the best outliner I've every used. Most other things that I write will be in BBEdit (where I'm writing this now). Whenever I have to do another presentation I'm thinking of using BigShow which was written by Aaron Hillegass of Big Nerd Ranch. It's very small and simple and uses XML. I'm thinking that if I organize things in OmniOutliner and then maybe use a bit of AppleScript to reformat things into the proper XML it can be a quick way to whip something up.
[/software]
link
Last year I first read about iStockPhoto when Zeldman wrote about them. iStockPhoto isn't your typical online source of royalty-free stock photography. What makes them a bit different is that they're more of a cooperative. Once you are acccepted (after submitting sample images) you can upload photos that others can license for use. It costs 50¢ US for each image, which is a bargain. The artist gets 10 of those cents which can be used for their own downloads-that's the cooperative part. There are some very nice images there and new things are being constantly uploaded. The self-serving part of this item is that I now have a bunch of images up there under my online name of chrisxero. Why should I hoard stuff when it can be shared?
[/web]
link
Older Bitdepth
January 2007
December 2006
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
Categorized Bitdepth
art
articles
books
film
film: festivals
learning
magazines
music
people
podcasting
software
sound
television
web
Relevant
Bad Metaphor podcast
Bitdepth Digest
My Vox
Screen Arts blog
My Tumblelog
my del.icio.us links
my 43 things
my tweets
