COM257: Media History and Theory

     Farley begins his article by stating, "a mobile telephone is a wireless device which connects to the public switched telephone network and is offered to the general public by a common carrier or public utility," and establishes that the history of the wireless system, or the 'cloud', we are connected to is just as important as the handset itself.  In 1945, the article "Phone Me by Air" described the potential for a system that would allow two-way radio service within a small area, and a year later, AT&T and Southwestern Bell began offering mobile-radio telephone service in 25 cities.  In 1947, Bell laboratories conceived in good faith that "the means for administering and connecting to many small cells would evolve by the time they were needed.”  After Bell's request, the FCC allocated more frequencies for mobile phone use, but however, these frequencies were released to other companies called Radio Common Carriers in order to establish competition.  The RCCs were more efficient in advancing mobile telephones and were the first to remove the need for operators, a.k.a. automatic dialing.  It took AT&T almost twenty years to catch up.  Meanwhile, mobile phone development and research was slowly picking up in other countries, but once Japan gained independence in 1952, the country set itself apart by creating quality manufacturing conditions, allowing it to catch up quickly to the technological innovations made in the international space.

     Throughout the rest of the 1960s, incremental buildings blocks to the future of mobile communications were falling into place.  There was Jack Kilby's invention of the integrated circuit in 1958.  Improved mobile features such as automatic dialing and direct mobile to mobile communcations were provided by some carriers.  Before 1964, communication was handled by users needing to press a button to speak, much like the walkie-talkie; however, with Bell System's Improved Mobile Telephone System, users could now communicate without this need, and once again, AT&T took about twenty years to catch up.  It was also during this time that the famous Nokia was formed. 

      During the 1970s, mobile phone development and outcomes began to pick up.  Bell System introduced the first commercial cellular radio service by using frequency reuse in a small zone system.  The system was implemented on a train called the Metroliner, allowed riders to make calls from payphones, and was managed by a computer system.  In the same year, Motorola introduced the first all-transister mobile set which hinted at the dwindling need for the vacuum tube.  Only a few years later, after an almost mobile phone cold war amongst competitors, Motorola pushed out the first handheld portable phone.  With Intel's efforts on processors and microprocessors, carriers anticipated the arrival of cellular.  Considering the demand was there and waiting lists were long, it was only a matter of time before the FCC opened up the frequency spectrum to accomodate for the demand of mobile phones and communications.

     Cellular development in the US slowed as it started to pick up internationally such as in Japan because of the FCCs intent on controlling wireless developments in the US.  It was around this time that Japan's high quality manufacturing conditions became an apparent threat and consideration.  Companies such as Motorola forced themselves to restructure they're quality standards.  In 1978, an Advanced Mobile Phone System went through testing, first with employees, and second with paying customers all using computer based switching systems.  The test showed that a large scale cellular system could work.  Throughout the late 70s and early 80s cellular networks began to pop up around the world.  The manufacturing space also continued to develop with changes as many started to turn to Japan because of its extremely low failure rates.  In 1982, American Telephone and Telegraph was broken up which in turn caused the Bell System which was serving 80% of Americans.  The fresh sense of competition invigorated the market with new products and services and caused the world over to rediscover the benefits of competition.

For me this was the most interesting part of the article.  Despite my crummy, yet-oh-so-loved-10-dolla' gophone, I secretly(okay not so secret anymore) enjoy reading about the latest developments in the mobile space.  When Apple released the iPhone, it changed the way a lot of us see our phones.  We expect more.  We want to interact with them in specific ways.  We want to be productive and be connected.  Before, screens were output devices.  Now, they are considered both output and input devices.  Had Apple not been successful with its touch-based systems, software companies such as Microsoft and hardware developers such as HTC would not have quickly adjusted their road maps.  Before, a smart-phone was primarily targeted towards businessmen and women, packed with the stylus, crummy operating system, productive software, email systems.  Now, a smart phone is probably touched based, packed with a sleek-looking operating system, productive software, email systems but also applications that connect to popular social networking sites such as facebook, myspace, or twitter, entertainment software, and probably even a market place to buy more apps that fulfill a variety of consumer needs.  So now, smart phones are being marketed towards the core-consumer as a all-in-one package. 

In Janet Abbate's article, "Popularizing the Internet", she explores the history, development, deployment, and mainstream growth of the internet.  What originally began as a privately researched tool, eventually become an open, widely accessible, and uninhibited medium that facilitated a wide variety of purposes including entertainment, economical, information sharing, and education.  Abbate attributes the growth and mainstreaming of the internet due to its organic nature, ability to grow and expand under a variety of circumstances, and increasingly provide a number of ways to share content.

It was sometime during the late 1960s and continued into the 1970s that the roots of the internet began to take shape within the research confines of ARPA.  Initial work was primarily done through universities such as the University of California and the University of Utah.  In the mid-1970s, ARPANET was handed over to the Department of Defense.  Even then, much of the research was still left up to universities which created disparity amongst researchers because some computer scientists were left out of the loop.  This was a problem because a lot of the work done had been a product of collaboration amongst researchers.  In 1979, a meeting was called in order to address the extremely private and closed nature of the research being conducted.  However, it was not until 1983 that the military portion of ARPANET was broken off into a separate network, MILNET.

In the late 1980s, commercial offerings began to appear.  The connection of NSFNET to MCI was approved and services such as e-mail were soon established.  Networks such as USENET provided universities with a cheap means of connecting.  A variety of other networks that up until that point, were individual, separate entities so to speak merged into the internet.  Dial-up services that had been offered for free were also being merged into what was becoming an increasingly interconnect web.

As the internet began to grow and more and more users were find their way into the system, it was becoming evident that there needed to be a better way to organize information and files.  At this point, the internet was almost, if not, exclusively textual.  After numerous attempts to create some sort of a hierarchy, it was Tim Berners-Lee's conceptualization of hyper-text that set the foundation for html and the world-wide-web.  Because he had released his implementation as open-source, it facilitated a wide-spread adoption and therefore acceptance of the his developed semantics.  Likewise, browsers, after a number of implementations, really took hold with the introduction of the Mosaic browser – which was graphical in nature.  Eventually, Mosaic's popularity fell with the introduction of other competing browsers.

I think following the creation and growth of the internet can be quite the head-ache.  There are a lot of players involved and surprisingly, the history goes all the way back into the 1960s.  The internet has become a very important component to our lives whether we chose to take advantage of it or not.  In mobile phones, the new key term is 'the cloud'.  Mobile phone hardware and software manufacturers are starting to push the notion that all our vital information(personal, contacts, calendars, pictures, etc.....) can all be stored on the internet which can be accessed wirelessly(hence the coinage 'the cloud').  Before, synching your information with your mobile was largely left to the technical savy because mobile hardware and software would have to be programmed to interface with a variety of potential computer hardware and software packages – which meant, mobile devices would be setup to interface with only popular, widely used programs such as outlook.  In other words, if you wanted to sync data between your pc and your mobile, you did not have a lot of accessible options.  Now, because data moves seamlessly between a software package such as outlook and its web equivalent, and because the internet can be accessed wirelessly, syncing is much more easier and becoming an important capability of most phones.

       This week's reading by Aarseth discusses and analyzes the use of text.  Throughout the reading, text is broken down into units, categorized, and provided functions.  Linear text, as expected, is sequential.  The arrangement and order is significant and key to the fundamental understanding of its content.  Non-linear text is obviously the opposite.  There is no set order or sequence that text is governed by and is free from the notion of order.  As I already hinted it, Aarseth breaks text into single units, which he refers to as textons.  His definition of texton is as follows:

        The reading starts off by pointing out that the introduction of the television was inhibited by a few factors.  First, the FCCs primary interest was radio and put a freeze on the start up of new broadcasting stations.  There was also little interest was expressed by radio and cinema enthusiasts.  And of course, it didn't help that it was concluded that television would only appeal to the wealthy class.  However, despite all of this, in a matter of five to six years, the number of televisions in use went from just over one-hundred thousand to twenty million, and was declared "the poor man's latest and most prized luxury" by Business Week early after production began for the masses.

       Because it was a new media, a new form factor so-to-speak, there were some learning pains associated with the television for both consumers and the businesses involved.  Early on, cinema lost its appeal television because while both provided similar experiences(moving pictures), television was much more economical to consumers and could be experienced in a personal space.  Up until the introduction of magnetic tape, there problems with broadcasting content more than once.  Thankfully, this freed content from the confines of time so that it could be broadcast whenever and where-ever.  Even after eating away some of the cinema's appeal, cinema found its way onto the television by way of production companies marketings broadcast licenses and rights to networks.  And of course, over time, content became conventionalized.  There were game shows.  There were dramas.  There were soap operas.  There were sitcoms.  There were broadcasts of historical events.  And each carried specific expectations and qualities by the creators and viewers.  Sitcoms are filmed and acted differently than lets say dramas or game shows.  It is probably the variety of content available that made the television such a lasting commodity that it be.

       As I sit here eating my very delicious sub curtesy of Subway, I can't help but think how television has become even more personalized.  With the introduction of dvr which has been around for a long time now(Tivo), though recently becoming mainstream with providers such as DirectTV offering them as part of their service, I can record most any program on television and watch it on my own time.  I can tell it record so many minutes before or after the program, whether or not I want to record reruns, and how long I want to keep recordings available.  Even now, I can view many of my favorite television shows online should I forget to record them and miss them all together when they are first broadcasted.  And with internet-video technology becoming more sophisticated, I can watch high quality video straight from the internet and if I'm savy enough, even watch internet material on my tv(though I can't because I still have a very dependable 27inch Samsung television I bought over 10 years ago).  And today, when I stopped by The Reverie for my morning coffee, I couldn't help notice a few regulars watching television shows saved to their Apple iPod or their Gateway laptop.  So, as we are becoming increasingly mobile due to mobile devices becoming more and more sophisticated with every waking moment, so is television.  Not only is the programming becoming more mobile, but information that would traditionally be viewed in a news broadcast can now be experienced in a variety of formats online(clips, updated articles, rss feeds, etc...).  So, we are in fact consuming and experiencing 'television media' in a increasingly variety of ways.   

       Carey James establishes that he thinks that the telegraph is essentially one of the most underrated technological breakthroughs due to its lack of reference and attractiveness to historians.  He points out it was the first method to alter the relationship between physical distance and communication.  Physical distance was no longer a factor now that messages could be sent electronically through wires.  The telegraph also influenced how corporations and businesses handle such technology, being the first of its kind, so it is natural to think that it also set the initial standards for businesses maintaining and providing such a service.  As James puts it, society "demanded a new body of law, economic theory, political arrangements, management techniques, organizational structures, and scientific rationales with which to justify and make effective the development of a privately owned and controlled monopolistic corporation."  Because of the nature of the telegraph, relations became more impersonal having not requiring face to face contact.  Because of questions raised by its context within religious values and faith, it even helped established how technology is developed and justified.  Much like how books eventually made their way from the churches to universities, technology quickly became housed and prodded within the university engineering community.

       I would think it would be obvious that ground work for the telephone and communication technology is deeply rooted in advances such as the telegraph, even as small and minute as it may seem now.  I guess I would like to compare the telegraph to texting, mainly because of how messages were sent, recieved, and decoded - messages would require to be short and concise.  While we are now almost essentially limitless in our mobility today, texting is very similar in that it allows us to quickly and discretely send messages.  Due to the nature of texting, messages need to be short, concise, and usually abbreviated in order to be effective and useful.  What was once a very underused feature, is now one of the most popular forms of communication, especially now that text messages can now be associated with instant messaging accounts - connecting mobile users with computer users.

Hobart and Schiffman(H & S) begin the reading by giving us a bit of perspective of the late sixteenth century, from the eyes of Michel de Montaigne.  Without the printing press, his library’s abundance of literature would not have been possible.  H & S then go on to describe the “avalanche” of information that had poured over Europe, and they propose that while information went from being a luxury to a commodity, that this out pouring of information proved more confusing then enlightening.  Now, there was information that was contradictory, especially information that didn’t fit within the “range of human values” promoted by the Catholic Church.

H & S delve further into the history of the book – primarily focusing on the twelfth century where the demand for books had also increased.  During this time, books were very much still being written and copied by hand.  However, because of the demand, books had become smaller, and cursive scripts were used because they were faster to write.  It was during this time, that universities were stimulating the book trade – pushing the form of the book to be more manageable as they became more accessible in university libraries.  It was here that contradictory information was addressed through ‘glossing’ or providing commentaries(would these be footnotes?) between the lines or in the margins.  This way of managing information became just as important as the literature itself as ‘glosses’ began to be incorporated into books.  Another way information was organized was through a summa where a core truth was established amongst the variety of existing interpretations.  Eventually, this lead to the format of providing a question, followed by a listing of contradictory “pronouncements”, and tying it all together with some sort of conclusion.  It is in these passages, that I believe H & S are trying to establish that the format in which information is organized is just as important as the information itself.

H & S go back even further, around fifth century B.C, in order to describe commonplace thought.  Commonplace thought is the process of memorizing information through spatial relationships.  Information is remembered in associations with symbols or iconic imagery.  These graphic representations a further organized into contextual spaces.  For example, passages and readings associated with weaponry may be further associated with an armory.  Religious passages could be associated with a temple.  The idea was that remembered information could be utilized quickly and flexibly accessed.  In a way, these memory spaces become modules are the benefit to this process is how these spaces are interlinked with one another.

H & S connect the history of the book and common place thought be readdressing the issue that the outpouring of books, probably created mostly confusion.  Now, you have a wealth of information, but a lot of that information contradicts one another or contradicts already established beliefs and morals.  H & S propose the first instinct in such cases is to ignore the extraneous information or to shutdown the absorption of information completely.  However, I believe they are proposing that utilizing commonplace thought, this shutdown can be averted.  Information would be stored spatially, in context, and in reference to other pieces of information, and interconnections or links would occur organically upon the regurgitation of information.

I think it is interesting to read this now, considering it was originally published in 1988.  In a way, it reminds me of what is going on today with the internet.  In a way, it is the ‘printing press’ of today because now, anyone can easily publish content/information.  The fact that a majority of our information is accessed virtually, provides an even bigger stage to anyone with something the feel the need to share.  Even just looking at Facebook, a small yet very influential piece of the web, it is very accessible.  It is very easy to post pictures, updates, personal information, etc….  Some people feel the need to update their pages regularly throughout the day, because they feel that their, “so and so is bored in biology…” is important for all their friends to know.  Granted, on the flipside, for some people, their friend’s updated status messages are very important to them.  Facebook in general allows us to access a lot of information about anyone we’ve friended.  In my case, most of that information is extremely unimportant.  However, I do and will take the time to go through and absorb the information that is, such as viewing a friend’s recently uploaded pictures from a recent ski trip or another friend’s wedding pictures.  Someone else, however, may find more content going through his or her friend’s status updates or wall posts.  Facebook, like a lot of many Web 2.0 sites, organizes information into modules, each being accessible to web application developers through an API.  In a way, these modules quickly become interlinked through tagging and contextual relationships.  These connections occur organically as information is uploaded and changed.  For example, pictures of me, not uploaded by me, can be accessed through my profile or the friend’s profile who uploaded them.  So while the web in general and Facebook specifically, provide a lot of information(some of which may or may not be relevant to the viewer), we are beginning to see this information become organized into modules that can be accessed through a variety of means.

       Hayes begins by providing the definition that "virtuality is the cultural perception that material objects are interpenetrated by information patterns."  She states that this perception inhibits technological progress that further assist in the reinforcement of cultures perception of virtuality.  This duality is reinforced with a reference to genetics and the human body.  Genes are a biological, sequential pattern that determines how an individual body develops.  From what I understand, the commentary on duality here, is stating that the relationship is only one way.  The body is derived from genetic code, and while you can't have one without the other, the reverse isn't true.  The body does not determine the genetic code contained within.  Using this premise, she plainly press the notion that information isn't reliant on material form.  I think she goes on to essentially describe transcoding in one of the most convoluted ways possible.  The idea of extracting information from something - which has a pattern, which can then be encoded into another medium.  And the idea of pattern is reminiscient of Manovich's numerical principal in defining new media.  At one point she discusses information/noise.  According to her, noise is in fact information, however, information that was unintended to be captured or sent.  Another interesting idea she points out, is that information ruled by patterns contain less information than those ruled by randomness - which makes sense considering redundancy is what makes a pattern a pattern.

       She eventually begins to describe elements of virtuality.  The first element is access.  Because information is not physically tangible, it is not a matter of possession but a matter of access.  Information can be copied and encoded into other formats.  I can't copy my dogs for someone else to have - I could breed them, but any pups would be entirely different dogs - not copies.  Another element is mutation.  Once a pattern can no longer be followed, one needs to be come up in its place.  This leads her into her discussion of the virtual book and how they are reinvisioned in virtual spaces.  In Myst designers are relying on users understanding of books and the conventions associated with them.  Because most if not all users, now how books function and what their purpose is, designers can afford to give new, unexpected qualities to these virtual books - expecting users to pick up on these new conventions with little to no trouble.  Physical books are limited in that they need to be read in a specific sequence in order to be understood.  Virtual spaces allow branching paths or multiple dimensions to move through.  Hypertexts provide non-linear paths through content.  I think Hayes' overall point was to essentially point out that virtual spaces, because they are not materially defined, are built upon existing conventions(books for example) but introduce new ones as well(hypertexts).

       Out of all the readings, this was the most difficult to follow.  I feel like she is trying to describe many different ideas in the most complicated way possible.  Manovich was far more entertaining and therefore, far more easier to understand.  She kind of touches on this - when she discusses noise - but she fails to discuss that when information is extracted, the resolution of the pattern will have a great impact(at least in my opinion) of how that information is further accessed and interpreted.  When I scan in imagery to use in photoshop, I usually attempt to scan it in at as high a resolution possible.  But even today - the higher the resolution, the longer amount of time it takes to transcode.  It also means it will take up more space on my hard-drive, and extremely large files become unyieldy to work with.  However, once you decrease the resolution - that information is lost.  This is true when it comes to film and sound as well.  For argument's sake, imagine transferring your entire brain bank onto a computer.  Would you like the possibilitiy that your previously attained knowledge would now exist with less fidelty - just in order for all of it to fit on a hard drive?  On the flipside, once its there, its there.  Memories and knowledge wouldn't fade away completely.

     In this article, Manovich immediately breaks down 'augmented space' into three components: surveillance, cellspace, and electronic displays.  His idea of surveillance is that information about the physical space is extracted, and cellspace is the wireless transmition of that data.  Electronic displays then convey content by manipulating that data in some way.  A common application of this entire process or these components would be GPS units.  Information about a person or thing's physical location is determined by information sent to and from satellites.  Hardware units then display this location, usually some icon sitting on top of some sort of map.  He then continues to list a variety of ideas and technologies that would assist in this process, but they all would fall under three categories he had described earlier: monitoring/surveillance, cellspace/data transmission/computation, and hardware.  The combination of all three of these notions would equate to context-aware devices.

     He then continues to discuss the difference between augmentation and immersion.  Immersion is when you are completely engrossed in an activity that you become mostly oblivious to the actual physical space, such as watching a movie or playing a videogame or reading a good book.  Augmentation is when something is enhanced such as listening to a mp3 player while working out at the gym - you're very much still aware of what you are doing, but the addition of the player most likely makes the experience more pleasant.  The metaphor of the art gallery establishes progress made in the augmentation of space.  Traditionally, galleries displayed two-dimensional pieces such as paintings or photographs.  While they still do, eventually artists started to push the idea of encompassing viewers in the space - so the artwork is the manipulated physical space.  But, like paintings and photographs, this is static.  With the technology we have today, physical space could be further manipulated by the inclusion of dynamic media.  Before, the only interaction between the viewer and space would be based solely on emotional and mental gestallts that the viewer projected onto it.  Now, the spaces can actually interact back with the viewer.

     This eventually leads Manovich into the discussion of architecture.  How it is and how it could be augmented.  Today, it is not uncommon for us to see electronic displays used for all sorts of purposes placed throughout everyday spaces such as malls, airports, and office buildings.  But how can we take this further and augment the physical form and material buildings are made out of? 

     It won't be long before cell phones, gaming handhelds, mp3 players, minicomputers begin to fall under one umbrella.  Now, cell phone makers approach cell phone design based on very specific consumer interests.  Phones marketed towards the business-world are loaded with email and productivity features.  Those marketed towards our generation may have enhanced video/photo capabilities or enhanced multimedia features.  Those marketed towards an older generation may just be capable doing phone related tasks.  However, the trend is slowly pushing for cell phones(which some are even marketed as mobile computers of the sort) to encompass a multitude of enhanced features.  We're finding more and more intuitive applications for these devices.  You can now scan barcodes at the store, on your cellphone and use that to look up price information there at the store.  Or, a recent android application will send you reminders based on your location - if it knows you have to go grocery shopping, it'll buzz you when you are near a grocery store.  It'll even automatically silence your cellphone when you enter a movie theatre.  One day, you may be able to walk in a museum and additional information and content could be sent directly to your cellphone - even if its just the audio tour.  Or, maybe you could set your phone to send you the daily specials of your favorite pub every time you're in the area.  The technology is there, its just a matter of time before its taken advantage of in this capacity.

In the section The Forms and Database of his article, Manovich discusses the form media takes today, as well as the way it is stored, organized, and retrieved. The first form for the organization of information in media is database storing any types of documents, records or even digital clips. The second form of information storage is virtual, for example, video games, VR, human-computer interfaces, etc. Manovich shows the transition of the old media storage in museums, libraries, to its storage in a computer database. Digital databases taking over in the society have people “navigating” through the virtual world now, no matter whether they work or play. Indeed, database is argued to be the only model for all the data we have to store. And database in the Internet is like a fish in the water. Web pages are an unlimited database, which can be edited at any point in time, and thus, is never complete. The more we process into the world of the internet, the more organized the data becomes on the WebPages. The data is now organized following a specific algorithm, a hidden logic, as Manovich calls it. Database today has entered a competition with narrative. To contrast the two, Manovich characterizes database as material (paradigm) and narrative as de-materialized (syntagm). And paradigm is privileged over a syntagm. In new media, database and narrative are still at a battle. Photography, for example represents database, while film represents a narrative, and it is difficult to prioritize the two. The next step for the media would be to have narrative and database merge into a new form.

It is interesting to notice how the covered in class topics interact and merge into one another. New media opens up a possibility for the development of the digital interface, which creates computer database, which gives a possibility for a narrative development. All these concepts existed in the world of the old media having different physical forms and locations; now it is possible to have all gathered in one place, in one computer, and data storage is not only facilitated but also allows for more and more creativity.  

In the section The Forms and Database of his article, Manovich discusses the form media takes today, as well as the way it is stored, organized, and retrieved. The first form for the organization of information in media is database storing any types of documents, records or even digital clips. The second form of information storage is virtual, for example, video games, VR, human-computer interfaces, etc. Manovich shows the transition of the old media storage in museums, libraries, to its storage in a computer database. Digital databases taking over in the society have people “navigating” through the virtual world now, no matter whether they work or play. Indeed, database is argued to be the only model for all the data we have to store. And database in the Internet is like a fish in the water. Web pages are an unlimited database, which can be edited at any point in time, and thus, is never complete. The more we process into the world of the internet, the more organized the data becomes on the WebPages. The data is now organized following a specific algorithm, a hidden logic, as Manovich calls it. Database today has entered a competition with narrative. To contrast the two, Manovich characterizes database as material (paradigm) and narrative as de-materialized (syntagm). And paradigm is privileged over a syntagm. In new media, database and narrative are still at a battle. Photography, for example represents database, while film represents a narrative, and it is difficult to prioritize the two. The next step for the media would be to have narrative and database merge into a new form.

It is interesting to notice how the covered in class topics interact and merge into one another. New media opens up a possibility for the development of the digital interface, which creates computer database, which gives a possibility for a narrative development. All these concepts existed in the world of the old media having different physical forms and locations; now it is possible to have all gathered in one place, in one computer, and data storage is not only facilitated but also allows for more and more creativity.  

     In this section, Manovich explores the juxtaposition of how data is stored versus how data is acted upon.  An even more appropriate title for this section would be "The Database and the Algorithm".  Throughout the chapter, he maintains a sort of back and forth treatment - addressing data storage in one paragraph and then addressing how data may be used in virtual spaces such as games(a popular example of his).  In doing so, he touches on the notion of narrative, how the story is portrayed and how data use correlates to that.  Manovich points out how 'new media' largely relies on collections of information(text, images, film, etc..) that are organized in some sort of hierarchy, and the narrative that is created is based on how these collections are organized and fed to users.  In the case of virtual spaces - games - the narrative is constantly responding to the user.  Artificial intelligence may be programmed to be more aggressive when the player is vulnerable or may be programmed to assist the player when the system has recognized that the player has spent too long trying to solve a puzzle.  I guess it would be easy to say that in examples such as the internet - data is passive - as in once it is there, it is there, and in examples such as games - data is active - it is programmed to respond to conditions set forth by the designer but also conditions created by the player.  Towards the end of the chapter he begins to discuss the importance of sequence and relationships derived from those sequences.  In this discussion, Manovich relies mostly on discussing film projects from the likes of Peter Greenaway and Vertov.  He talks about Greenaway's approach to filmmaking as a series of elements not ordered in any specfic way.  Vertov's film, Man with a Movie Camera is described as been having edited, not to follow a pre-existing linear script, but ordered to create a point about the meaning of everyday things and occurances.  Manovich goes back to how the shots in this film are really just a database or a catalogue of information - ordered with a specific hierarchy to serve a specific purpose.

     When it comes to narrative, I think the new way of telling stories is a mash-up of a variety of forms and media.  It is not uncommon for a movie to spawn a book, a video game, action figures, posters, etc...  And the order could arranged in fashion as a book could spawn a movie, action figures, a video game, posters, etc...  However, with the rise of the internet and technologies such as flash, java, and ajax, its now easier to create and publish content that is made up of text, images, videos, sound, and interactivity.  People can now keep up with their friends and learn about their contacts in Facebook.  By looking over a friend's pictures, posts, tags, badges, status updates, and profile information, someone could easily create an idea of who this friend is and what he/she is all about.  Granted, it would be impossible to truly discern what someone is really like without meeting him/her in person, but someone's online presence will alter how he/she is perceived.  Another example would be a recent studio project I have been working on.  The idea was to create a digital family album.  The final piece relies on digitized family videos dating all the way back to the 1980s, photos dating back all the way to the early 1900s, audio, animaiton, digital paintings and a ton of other content.  Someone traversing through the application would hopefully learn about my family and its lineage by watching snippets of videos, experience memories reaccounted in text or audio, and create perceptions of our culture based on imagery chosen to be displayed.  In both these examples, content or data is put out there for viewers to see.  In the case of Facebook, the hierarchy is determined by the type of content.  Pictures are displayed in their own section.  Profile information has its own section.  Wall posts has its own section.  In the case of my flash application, the hiearchy is determined by family name(Andrassy, Santos, and Defago) and motifs that are repeated in my family's history(food, dysfunction, and laughter).  In general, I think the narrative is very much correlated to the 'database' or the hiearchy of how media and data is organized.

Without a doubt the printing press revolutionized Old Media. However
the revolution of New Media is less obvious. In his article Manovich
explores what exactly new media is, how it is defined, and what is the
technology that most exemplifies it. The birth of New Media is so
difficult to pin down because so many technologies that help make up
the components of New Media were developed around the same time, and
shared characteristics and functions. The daguerreotype, the analytical
engine, cinematography and the tabulator all served their own
distinctive purposes and were all revolutionary in their own right but
they were all precursors to the most widely accepted summarization of
new media: the computer. The computer was unique because of its
distribution, exhibition, and communicative capabilities. As times
ticks on and the computer continues to evolve, the need for Old Media's
technologies are quickly being extinguished. According to Monovich,
what sets Old Media and New Media apart can be broken down into five
components: numerical representation, modularity, automation,
variability, and transcoding. All of the aforementioned components
demonstrate how complex and sophisticated New Media really is. The use
of media and computerization become increasingly intertwined throught
the years.When I think of New Media, I most definitely think of
computers. Computers can not be ignored and we do not want to ignore
them. They have come to influence almost every facet of our lives.
Libraries of knowledge can be found on them, as well as the people we
choose to communicate with. Computers become more and more personal as
technologies become more advanced. The fact that advertisers can track
our likes and dislikes, and that computers can carry on somewhat
meaningful and understanding converstations with us just show how the
way we communicate with the world is becoming more sophisticated. Even
something as simple as Facebook has a daily impact on my communicaiton.
I can keep up with my friends who are out of town, not only by messages
but with pictures, games, special interest applications. The realm of
communication will continue to expand as long as new technologies are
developed.

     In this chapter, Manovich raises some interesting points in regards to the interface.  Once again he initiates his thought process with some historical context.  He describes the film Blade Runner and the GUI that accompanied the Macintosh computer back in 1984 as media that establish cultural expectation and language in regards to interacting with computer-like devices.  Files can be created, deleted, copied, pasted, organized into folders, and a countless number of actions.  These files are always there, don't degrade with time(unless of course there is hardware failure).  These are the metaphors we've grown accustomed to and expect from future iterations of hardware.  Manovich also describes how media is now regularly and will continue to be mixed together in mash ups - such as with one of his primary examples, the game Myst.  Like many contemporary computer games, we're seeing developers draw upon the language that has been long established in film.  We're seeing camera movements from film recreated in these virtual spaces - zooms, pans, dolley shots, etc... Drawing upon what film has been successful at since its conception, compositional elements(lighting, color, perspective, etc....) are being manipulated in the same spirit as they would be on a live-action set.  The knowledge and the understanding of text and print that has been accumulated for ages is now being put to use in a new way.  Much like how the language of film is being used in these media mash-ups, so is text and print.  How text is displayed and animated determines how users read and absorb what is actually occuring on screen.  Before, text was relating to primarily flat, printed layouts, and spaces.  Now, with computers, we can cheat a 3rd dimension, things can move, and can be displayed with other forms of media.  Then, the final piece of the puzzle is the HCI(human-controled interface).  Because we primarily interact with media through computer devices be it a desktop that is nailed down or a mobile phone, we've been conditioned to expect certain ways of manipulating digital content.  On a hardware level - there are buttons, keyboards, mice, and touch sensitive screens.  On a software level - there are digital buttons, windows, scroll bars, tabs, etc.... each serving a specific function and carrying a specific expectation.  In the case of a computer game like Myst, developers may decide to take advantage of these conventions so that users can get into the game quickly while still developing their own.  In Myst, because the images were pre-rendered in 3D and not rendered on the fly, the user couldn't freely move about the space.  In order to allow users to navigate, the mouse cursor would turn into an arrow showing which directions were available at that time.  One of the more interesting topics Manovich raises is the seperation of the interface and content.  Should the relate? Should they be accounted for seperately or as one?  If someone is trying to create a multimedia experience, how someone interacts with the content is going to be just as important as the content itself.  The goal of most film makers is to get the viewer to willingly suspend his or her sense of reality in order to be fully immersed in the film.  Likewise, if a user's experience is interrupted by the interface, then has the experience been successful?

     The Art and Design program here is very broad and open.  It appears to foster both artists and designers.  I am in classes with peers that consider themselves purely painters, animators, or sculptors.  On the flipside, I am in classes with those that work in all sorts of mediums and cater their process to the task at hand.  In my case, because of my computer science background, I tend to work digitally in software such as Flash - software used to create flash based applications which allows me to work visually and quantitatively at the same time.  One of the research projects I have been working on has been addressing the issue of how the interactive element relates to what is going on visually.  In one prototype, we give the user the ability to navigate an aerial view of campus using sweeping motions - no different than iPhone.  However, in our case, we aren't using touch-sensitive screens but taking camera input and turning that data into recognizable gestures.  Without a screen that picks up touch, we had to find a way to recreate the button in this particular space.  The user can't directly click on the button - but what we settled on was using time to determine whether a button is clicked.  Hover long enough, and the button will click.  Hover a tad longer and the button could be set up to recognize that as a double click.  However, based on user feedback, the user is expecting an instantaneous reaction - so we had to conjure up ways to get the user to expect interactivity that is time based rather than something that occurs instantly.  This resulted in playing with button animations, having the buttons grow in size or glow over time.

     Like how Apple established GUI conventions, it has established touch or gesture-based conventions with the iPhone.  Being the front-running touch device, Apple has crafted a new set of expectations from users.  Not only that, but it has also brought gesture-based hardware and software to the forefront.  It has changed the mobile and handheld space because the iPhone's success has made it clear that users want touch-based products.  Microsoft has shifted its Windows Mobile brand in order to better compete with Apple and deliver what users are expecting.  Google has followed suit by putting an open-source operating system that natively supports touch out there for developers to play with.  Other handheld manufacturers have begun to introduce touch hardware into their brands.  The interface, be it hardware or software or something else, is going to help determine the direction that new media goes in.  Such as with touched based hardware, media will now be designed with that in mind - knowing that the user will be interacting with it with their fingers or hands instead of a keyboard and mouse.

       In this article, Manovich sets out to define 'new media'.  It begins with a brief history of the computer and programming, dating back to Babbage and Ada and sets it on a collision course with developments in image making.  Manovich then continues on to develop characteristics, rules, or standards that are unique to 'new media'.  The most distinct and important aspect of 'new media' is that it is digital - meaing, it is discrete and is made up units or building blocks.  A digital image is ultimately a matrix of pixels, each containing a RGB color value, and in its purest form, that image is really just a sequence of binary data.  However, an analog image, such as one processed on film cannot be broken down into discrete units - unless of course, it is digitized through a scanning process and thereby making its entrance into 'new media'.  And even then, this idea of being made up of discrete units can continue to go up the conceptual ladder.  Websites are a series of interconnected pages which are further broken up into pieces of content(text, imagery, digital video, flash, etc...), and under the hood, are made up a series of HTML tags.  Manovich also makes it a clear point, that 'new media' is modular.  These parts be it the page of a website or a group of pixels within an image, are interchangeable and can be reconfigured with ease.  I can alter the way a user moves through a website by moving around content, altering links, changing the layout, etc.....  'New media' can be replicated with ease and the initial quality will always remain(unless of course it becomes corrupted), whereas the quality of analog materials will always fade with time and use.  Manovich also discusses the idea of interactivity; however, he points out it is not necessarily unique to 'new media'.  While 'new media' has an emphasis on direct interaction by users/viewers(clicking, dragging, gestures),  paintings done by Da Vinci or the writings of Poe may provide intellectual stimulation. 

     Having initially started off as a computer science major and now being in art and design, I found it very interesting that Manovich interwove the initial makings of the computer with the origins of the automated loom, photography, and film.  Having briefly studied both tracks, it never occured to me to make the connections that he does.  However, it does make sense, and it is especially relevant now that software(the visuals or the media) is what sells hardware(the computer) these days.  Gone are the days where raw-power will be the primary selling factor for any computer-based hardware.  Now-a-days, we, the consumer, are largely buying devices that will provide us with appealing and fashionable experiences, and so it only makes sense that they be intertwined from the get go.  For example, there are devices that provide better audio, more features, and more storage capacity than an iPod - yet the iPod has more market share than anything put out by other companies.  A lot of this has to do with a highly effective marketing campaign that advertises the experience of listening to music on the go coupled with Apple's design sensibilties when it comes to the hardware.  And with portable devices becoming smaller and even more portable, 'new media' is breaching almost every aspect of our lives.  I can keep a calendar, track my workout routines, play music, play videos, play games, make grocery lists, send email, browse the web, and do a whole lot more on one device that fits snug in my pocket.  It wasn't too long ago that I'd take notecards with me to the grocery store or a notebook to the gym.  With this sort of saturation, we're going to find new ways(software and hardware based) of delivering and directing content to others.  For example, devices that recognize gesture and the animations and time-based directives associated with it or the potential for texting to incorporate mini-movies or slideshows made on the fly.