November 2008

You are currently browsing the monthly archive for November 2008.

Yahoo! just launched a new advertising campaign, Start Wearing Purple. I have to admit that, while I’m not normally swayed by “go visit this web page” advertising, I was very eager to check it out, and I wasn’t disappointed. Its a flash based web page that talks about the color that has been with Yahoo since is original foundation. It talks about the story behind the company, why purple is so important and lists ton of facts, such as which star wars character’s light saber was purple.

This advertising campaign is a very interesting. It is effective because it is fun, simple, energetic and personal. If you check out the commercial it is full of people ordinary people (who I assume work for Yahoo) singing along to an energetic song. Its new and exciting. Other Ad campaigns like Apple, or the new Microsoft Ads, are either getting redudent or simply unenergetic.

Now I am an Apple fan, but even I will admit that running the same Ad campaign for 3 years doesn’t always work. The jokes are new, but the premise is the same, and honestly, I would like to see them change the format a bit.

Yahoos Ad seems fresh, and I think it is a good idea for a good campaign, with a simple premise: start wearing purple. Now, they aren’t saying that everyone wearing purple is a Yahoo person, but that Yahoo people wear purple. Purple is a very powerful color. In ancient times Purple was a sign of royalty or divinity, due to the fact that it was one of the most expensive dies to find. Now, by quirk of fate, Yahoo ended up with Purple walls instead of Gray walls (you can read about this at their site).

The nobility and history of the color aside, the premise for the campaign is simple. It doesn’t take too much effort to wear purple. Not everyone has a purple shirt, so it is somewhat unique. Obtaining a purple shirt isn’t overly difficult either. Again, the notion is simple. People respond to simple.

Yahoo’s problem is that they aren’t keeping with the simple mentality of their campaign. They are moving too quickly, and bundling too much unrelated marketing with the simple, yet wonderful premise of wearing purple. Along with the launch of the start wearing purple campaign, they have started working “Purple Pedals”, a project which follows the life of a bike by taking geo tagged images and uploading them to flickr. Interesting concept, but what exactly does it have to do with purple? The bike is purple? That’s not enough for me. The connection is too weak.

Yahoo, of recent, has not been producing the greatest technology. Their search has fallen behind Google; their ad program was trumped by Google; their groups, once popular, need a major UI uplift. I’m not ready to give up on Yahoo yet, they have one weapon. They are extremely good at acquiring companies with amazing products. HotJobs is by far the most easy to use job website out there. It’s not overly cluttered, the searches make sense. Usability is key on that site, which is good because people hunting for jobs are normally either pretty stressed or hunting on their free time. Flickr is another powerful product. It’s a simple app for sharing photos. I use it, many of my friends use it, and I tend to log in from time to time to see what my friends are shooting. These are both powerful products that were developed outside of Yahoo and then brought in.

Yahoo needs to recognize what makes these products great, and pass it on to their internal developers. Their CEO just stepped down, and there are continued rumors of a Microsoft buyout, but even in that event, Yahoo needs a better plan on how to unite their products, and make things work. Now, simplicity for users does not mean simplicity for developers. They have their work cut out for them, but if they can see the great talent in these external products, I see no reason they can’t apply to their internal products as well.

I was driving my friend Mike home from a bike ride, when he asked me if I thought that I had learned anything unique from cheerleading. Whether that sport in and of itself was unique enough that I felt I had learned things that I might not have learned from a different sport. This is a really great question. Now, I chose cheerleading because it captured my interest with the gymnastics and throwing people around, not to mention the great seats for football and basketball games, but I do feel I have taken some unique things from the sport that might be hard to find in total in any other sport. I think some of the things I’m about to mention can be achieved in other sports, but I don’t think the combination of all of them really exist.

Here’s a brief list of what I intend to cover:

  • Basic History
  • Co-Ed in nature
  • Not Position Based
  • The Community
  • Strong Diversity

Basic History

Not all cheerleading programs are co-ed, but the sport has really started to grow to the point where seeing a co-ed team is not that unheard of. It’s funny, but cheerleading was actually started by men in the 1880s. There is a large reference to this in the book Cheer! and on Wikipedia. Women started taking over the sport during the first World War.

Modern cheerleading, which I could take an entire post to explain started more in the 1970s and 1980s. During its formation, the rules were very fluid and there were a lot of stunts and tricks that have now become illegal. Men and women worked together to produce tall pyramids and perform interesting acrobatics. It is during this time that competitions began to really become popular. Cheerleading had previously been only to support other sporting programs.

Cheerleading in its nature can be a very dangerous sport. Over the decades it has become the number one reason for high school girls to visit emergency rooms. Please note, that even though it is the number one reason for visiting ER rooms, some argue (and I agree), that it is still not as dangerous as other contact sports like Football. Due to some of the dangers, several organizations have stepped in to provide training for coaches and set up insurances for institutions conducting cheerleading. I am a certified AACCA (American Association of Cheerleading Coaches and Administrators) coach. These organizations also somewhat restrict some of the skills that should be taught or performed. The benefit is that we reduce the number of injuries, but sometimes at the cost of some of the original excitement that was once possible.

Cheerleading consists of several different types of actions, just like baseball players have to bat and field, there are several different areas for cheerleaders.

  • Cheering or attempting to lead the crowd to create more excitement for the current sporting event
  • Stunting putting each other up in the air to better attract the attention of the crowd.
  • Tumbling and Jumping throwing oneself into the air to attract attention
  • Dancing moving the body to music to get the crowd more energized.

Each cheerleader will have stronger or weaker points in the list above, and they can change throughout the life-cycle of a cheerleader. For example, when I started out, I was a very strong Tumbler/Jumper. As I went off to college, I developed my stunting and cheering somewhat to the determent of my tumbling. I have never been a strong dancer.

Co-Ed in Nature

Generally, men tend to be stronger than women of the same build and size. Don’t get me wrong, there are a ton of women out there who can kick my butt, but I’m speaking about the average, not the exceptions. In the same manor, women tend to have greater flexibility than men (again a generalization, but bare with me). This duality leads to men having a strong place in certain aspects of cheerleading and women being generally better in other aspects. This duality has set up a very interesting balance in the sport of cheerleading whereby men and women co-exist in the same activity each of them providing specific benefits to the team.

Many other sports miss this connection. In what other sport do men and women co-exist on the same team, on a equal level, to compete together? I can name only a couple, like sailing, pairs tennis, etc.. These sports miss out on some of the other points I plan on mentioning later.

To name just a few of the benefits of this co-ed nature:

  • Broader respect for the opposite sex.
  • Better conflict resolution skills between genders.

Not Position Based

Many sports are position based. For example, Basketball. There are five players and four positions:

  1. Point Guard (1 player)
  2. Shooting Guard (2 players)
  3. Small Forward (1 player)
  4. Center (1 player)

Each person who makes it onto the court slides into one of these rolls. As you get more professional the roles blend, and responsibilities are diluted between roles, but basically everyone fits into a position. When someone comes off the bench to replace a player, the responsibilities are the same and it is relatively easy for that person to walk in and play. While there is a dynamic of team chemistry, responsibilities are set per position. Each players responsibilities stay relatively consistent even if the other players on the court are substituted.

Basketball isn’t the only sport that is position based. Football, basketball, lacrosse, and soccer are all somewhat position based. Cheerleading is also “somewhat” position based. There are several roles in cheerleading stunting:

  • Base- someone who helps lift another person of the ground and maintains a connection with the person being held up in the air.
  • Flier- someone who is lifted up into the air.
  • Spot- A spot may or may not be required to bear a fair share of the weight of the flier, but is also responsible for watching the flier and directing the other bases in terms of controlling the stunt

At most levels, bases normally work in pairs, with one flier, and one or more spots (normally a back spot and front spot). The problem is that matching up a group together takes into consideration more than just position. Since each person in a stunt group has a different level of skill, each group will normally work at the level of the lowest skilled member, for safety reasons. Another important requirement for a successful stunt group is that members of the same group are matched physically. Bases with different heights will have to use some tricks in order to make a stunt work properly. It is far easier if bases are the same height. Spots will need to be able to reach the arms of the bases or legs of the fliers.

On top of the difficulty of matching a group up, there is the sheer chemistry of a group. People have to get along and respect the other members. Timing needs to be figured out. Changing one member of a group could cause the entire group to need to relearn timing.

Now, as you progress through the sport, you become more adaptable. To the really experienced cheerleaders, changing a member should have minimal effect on the functionality of a group, but it takes many years, and depending on the difficulty of the stunt could still have an effect. At the far elite level, even the people winning national partner stunt competitions work together for years (sometimes even traveling to different schools together).

All in all, I feel that the dynamic nature of stunting groups and the chemistry required to make this all work is something is very unique to cheerleading. Potentially sports like synchronized swimming might have similar problems, but that is not my expertise.

The Community

Cheerleading has a very interesting motto, “cheer for your team, not against everyone else”. The best feeling I ever got was when we placed second in a nationals. It wasn’t a competition I won. I was proud of how my team performed. The team in front of us deserved to beat us, they were better. We did the best routine we could and came out very successful. I spoke with our competition, congratulated them, and wished them much future success.

Now, there are some rivalries, but for the most part we really try to get along. I feel its not as competitive as a community. Yes, most teams want to win, but not every team is going to win every competition, and I might be idealistic, but my goal has always been to leave a floor with nothing left in me.

At games its very similar. Our teams may be fighting on the field or court, but we always try to go over and say hello to the other cheerleaders.

Another aspect to our community is the closeness of the major players. This might not be all that unique, but the despite the fact that there are so many kids involved in the sport, the major players in the community are well known. I cheered for a program called LCI. One of the directors, Lynne Mensack was a former Varsity rep, and so many people (even some out here in California) know of her, or have worked with her. Bottom line, the community might be huge, but the major players are small group of people.

Strong Diversity

Cheerleading is a very diverse sport. From the 3 year old minis to the people like Jeff Webb who have been in the sport since the 1970s, there are many different types of cheerleaders. There are people who specializing in tumbling, and those that specialize in stunting. Backgrounds are also very different. My background is martial arts, many come from gymnastics, some from wrestling, some even come from NCAA sports like Football after they have served their four years in their primary sport. Everyone comes to the sport with a different perspective.

Cheerleading is expensive, so you tend to see people who have the financial means more often, but many programs offer scholarships to those who can’t afford it. If it is a college based program, the cheerleading expenses are normally covered by the school.

Because the background is so diverse, and the nature of the community is so friendly, cheerleading offers a unique opportunity for you to interact with many different types of people. This might not be as unique as some of the other points in this article, but it is a large component of what makes cheerelading so special.

Conclusion

I’m not sure if all the factors mentioned above exist for everyone who has been involved with cheerleading, but in the very least, I hope they explain why I love the sport so much. I spend countless hours a week either coaching or cheering myself. I’ve been doing that since I started nearly 12 years ago, and while I’ve played other sports along the way, I always come back to cheerleading as being my favorite.

I’m a big apple fan. Everyone knows that. What everyone might not know is that I’m also a Sun fan. When I was younger I worked for an ISP that used Sun boxes. I worked on a few of them in college. I’m not an expert on a Sun box, but I always liked the company and what they stood for, and had no complaints with the systems I used.

Sun has been having a hard time recently. Their stock isn’t doing too well, and they haven’t really released anything too significant or market changing. In a world that was once dominated by the Sun OS, companies like Google have come along and produced massive success using nothing but linux pizza box machines. Sun is in charge of Java, but I’m not sure how they are developing a large enough revenue stream to support their previous infrastructure.

Sun recently released Fishworks, a product designed to be an integrated hardware and software platform. They used this platform to develop an integrated network storage solution. This post explains how they went from the end product idea to the platform design, through product implementation.

I’m not fully aware of what exactly Fishworks is (Network storage isn’t my area of expertise at the moment), but I just thought it was interesting the difference in approach between Fishworks and the iPhone.

These products are completely different. One is a network storage device, the other is a piece of consumer electronics. There are some important similarities:

  • Both Are Major Engineering Projects
  • Both Are Championed By Computer Companies
  • Both Are Intended to Be Sold to Clients
  • Both Are Considered To, Potentially, Be the Future Of Their Company

Within these similarities it is interesting to note how Sun and Apple differ in their product design cycles. Sun releases a product with a bunch of back end architecture, they announce the product, and don’t keep the design a secret. They share a ton of the technical details, open up the design process for anyone to read on the Internet. It is evident that the focus of the product development cycle, that Sun is not just focused on the end product, but also very heavily on the path and technology used to get there.

Apple releases the iPhone, talks about the functionality, and maybe a very high level overview of how the phone is built, but they keep it simple. Only after it is released do they start to think about developers and extensions. Their primary focus is getting the phone right. In contrast to Sun’s focus, their focus is on the end user, not necessarily the path to get there. Their hesitation on developing an iPhone SDK might have somewhat hindered their initial sales.

This is not say that the iPhone is a better built product than the Fishworks machines. I wouldn’t know, I don’t have experience with Fishworks (or anything else in its product class, either). It is just interesting how different companies present their products and focus. I have several semi-random thoughts:

  1. Apple is growing into a new product space. In the recent past Apple has been mostly a consumer product manufacturer, making relatively the same line of products since its inception. The change from Apple Computer to Apple Inc. carries more than just a name change, but a more global product shift. In this new area, Apple is young, Sun is old. Maybe Sun has learned the lesson about the importance of the technology behind a product.
  2. Sun might be too focused on the technology and not enough on their end users. Sun has been spending much of its time working on products like Java and OpenOffice. These projects are important, they help proliferate the name of Sun Microsystems, but they are both open source. They don’t provided direct revenue for Sun. Perhaps Fishworks will be different, maybe it will follow the same path.
  3. There will always be a place in this world for new hardware design. When I graduated college I was convinced that the future would be software based. Hardware would become irrelevant and software would be where the real innovation would happen. Both of the products I’m talking about here are a marriage of fantastic hardware and great software. While the hardware that I used in college is dying, new hardware products are emerging.

Tags: , ,

Recently I have just been posting a photo of the day with no content. Today, I’m posting three photos of relatively the same moment from three different perspectives.

This Picture was taken so the log would be the focus

This Picture was taken so the log would be the focus

This picture shows the same log with more foreground. I think the color of the log really makes it stand out.

This picture shows the same log with more foreground. I think the color of the log really makes it stand out.

This one is inbetween the other two images. Enough balence to see the texture in the sand around the log, but enough distance to leave you curious

This one is inbetween the other two images. Enough balence to see the texture in the sand around the log, but enough distance to leave you curious

On Saturday morning I got up at 5:00 am. My friends Mike and Kerry wanted to go to Santa Cruz to buy snowboards at the Santa Cruz board factory sale. The sale started at 8, but Mike wanted to get there early so he didn’t miss the good stuff. That meant we were going to leave at 6. With about a 20 minutes of driving between Mike and I, that meant I was up at 5.

We got down to the location by about 7 am, and were pretty much the first people there. So Mike and I walked around the area. I snapped this photo of a local auto shop.
It was a nice morning, but getting up that early really messes with you. I got a $2.50 muffin at a local shop to tie me over till the sale was done. I didn’t really need to buy anything. I’m quite happy with my equipment, and my board, while it is about 10 years old, has barely been used. However, me being the only one with a decent amount of snowboarding experience, I was asked to consult on a whole manor of things I didn’t know about. Quality and size of a board, amount of flex, width, etc. I did my best, and everyone walked out with a decent board. The only problem was that there were four of us in one car and we had to put down half of the back seats in order to fit anything in. So Kerry’s former roommate Steph and I had to cram into the back seats together. Being as we were the smallest in the car, this made sense, but was still not comfy.

After the board shop, it was decided that we would go to the Mystery Spot, but everyone was hungry so we ate first. Some little breakfast place in down town Santa Cruz. Steph sniped the bill, so I’m rather upset that I didn’t get her back yet. I hate owing people favors. This was followed by a trip to the Mystery Spot, and while I wasn’t happy about spending my last $5 on a ticket to something I thought was a hoax, I was able to snag my photo of the day there. This place, for those of you who have never been, is simply a bunch of theories about a magical hill in Santa Cruz. While the perception distortion was actually a little interesting, I felt like most of what they showed us could easily have been explained with basic physics. I think it would have been really fun to go to as a kid, but I thought I was just too old and too scientific to really enjoy the place. I might also have been too tired.

The day ended with a trip to Mel Cotton’s to look for boots and other various pieces of snowboarding attire. Again, I’m living on a budget so I didn’t buy anything, but it was still fun. Lunch was amazing sushi at a place called Sushi-O-Sushi. Found my new favorite roll ever, Tempurized Alaskan Role.

« Older entries