Foxboro website builder
Hello and welcome to this website builder Web Designer Foxboro video tutorial.
I’m Owen Corso from Google.
And today, we’re going to build a rich media expandable creative with video.
Let’s start by selecting file, New File.
This opens a dialog box where we will set up our ad.
First, let’s make out high of project.
We have four options– The default is Display & Video 360so we will leave that as is.
Data Driven Templates for Display & Video 360 Ad Canvas - Google Web Designer
Concluding with this series of tutorials, we will see now How To Solve A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube.
The main purpose of the series, is that you learn in a much more effective way how to solve the Rubik's cubes.
We have seen that the resolution of the Junior Cube it's a subset of the steps for the resolution of Standard Cube.
We will see now that in the case of 4x4 Rubik's Cube (and bigger cubes), the method of resolution of the Standard Cube is the base of resolution of more complex cubes.
A way to solve more complex Rubik's Cubes is accomplished through using what is commonly called the 3x3x3 reduction method.
In this method it is necessary that you know how to solve the Standard Cube. If you need to learn how to solve the Standard Cube, please read 'How To Solve A 3x3x3 Rubiks Cube'.
For simplicity this tutorial is divided in four pages, in this first page terms are defined and the method is described.
Table Of Contents• How to solve a 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube • Pieces and Faces • Aditional Faces • Turn Of An Internal Face • Description Of The Algorithm • Step 1, Solving The Centres • Step 2, Pairing up the Edges • Step 3, Finishing the Cube • The Color Scheme • Swapping Two Opposite Centres • Solve A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube • Step 1, Solving The Centres • I] First White Row • II] First Yellow Centre • III] Finishing the White Centre • IV] Concluding The Centres • Step 2, Pairing up the Edges • Pairing, Case A • Pairing, Case B • Step 3, Finishing the Cube • Last Layer Edges Parity Error • Incomplete Line • Incomplete Cross • Top Layer Edges Parity Error • Opposite Dedges • Adjacent Dedges • Top Layer Corners Parity Error • Corners In Line • Corners In Diagonal
How To Solve A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube
In order to understand How To Solve A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube, you need to be familiar with the notation. If you don't know it, please read 'How to solve a Rubiks Cube' before continuing.
For the purposes of the following tutorial, a series of colors will be chosen for the faces, you can choose others.
Pieces and Faces
- Corner ..- a physical corner piece. A corner piece has three sides. There are eight corners.
- Edge .....- a physical edge piece. An edge piece has two sides. There are twenty four edges.
- Centre ...- a physical centre piece. A centre piece has one side. There are twenty four centres.
- Face .....- a side of the cube. There are six external faces and six internal faces.
A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube has internal faces, they are named with a lowercase letter.
- Internal Upper Face - u
- Internal Down Face - d
- Internal Left Face - l
- Internal Right Face - r
- Internal Front Face - f
- Internal Back Face - b
Turn Of An Internal Face
In a 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube, the internal faces can turn.
To facilitate the turn (and the notation) of an internal face, this is rotated together with the outer face.
See the difference in the following examples of a clockwise turn of the External and the Internal Upper Face (also note the double arrow, which denotes to turn two faces).
How To Solve A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube - Description Of The Algorithm
The algorithm is divided in three steps.
Step 1, Solving The Centres
The first step in the solution is to solve the 4 Centre Pieces on each face of the cube.
Step 2, Pairing up the Edges
The next step is to Pair up the 24 Edges into 12 distinct Double Edge Pairs (Dedges)
Step 3, Finishing the Cube
When you have solved the Centres and Paired up the Edges, you should see your 4x4x4 Rubik Cube like a 3x3x3 Rubik Cube.
You can finish off the cube in the same way as a 3x3x3.
The Color Scheme
The 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube is an even cube and has no fixed Centre pieces to refer to.
There is no quick way to determine which color goes where in relation to the others. It is helpful to have a color scheme memorised:
Standard Color Scheme
- Yellow opposite White
- Blue opposite Green
- Red opposite Orange
If your cube is scrambled (or it doesn't have the standard color scheme), there is an easy way to determine the scheme.
Simply solve the corners of your 4x4x4 (assuming that you can solve the Corners of a 3x3x3).
Once you've figured out your colour scheme, memorize it or write it down.
Swapping Two Opposite Centres
At some point in your 4x4x4 Rubik Cube solving it is possible that you make a mistake with your Centres, such as transposing two Opposite Centres.
There is an easy way to fix it.
How To Solve A 4x4x4 Rubiks Cube - Algorithm
Now that you understood the method, it is time to put in practice.
Begin with the first step: Solving The Centres.Make money writing about your passions. Join HubPages ________________________________________________________________ Acknowledgement : Table Of Contents by Darkside ________________________________________________________________
Foxboro website builder
Next, we can select the type of ad.
We want to make an expandable, so we select Expandable on the left.
Next, we can set again ad’s dimensions.
We are building a 320 by 50that expands to 480 by 250.
So I will make those changes.
We then assign the Foxboro creative a name.
I will leave my Save ToLocation as the default, and leave the talk about set to Quick.
Once I’m happy with my settings, I click OK.
Google Web Designer creates the initial pages of the ad for me with the dimensions I defined.
The collapsed page already contains a Tap Area event to expand the ad and an expanded pageFoxboro with a close tap area to collapse back down.
Latest Dental Implants To Be Used
LYNN MERCIER: Thetruth is, like, if we want to evolve thematerial design system, we need to be able tobuild on top of the code, and each layer ofthat code matters.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU:The conveyor belt is-- designer works onsomething, developer takes it, and developer screams becausethere was no conversation.
I think that's one ofthe biggest challenges.
[MUSIC PLAYING] One of the challenges inthe beginning with material on the web was there's so manydifferent implementations.
Again, the singlesource of of truth, so you had Angular material,you had Polymer, you had MDL.
How have you found solvingthat single source of truth? LYNN MERCIER: Yeah.
Originally we had a unique teamof developers in both Android-- I'm sorry-- Angular,and Polymer, and all these otherweb frameworks sort of building their ownimplementations in material design.
But we found that we couldn'tkeep that going at scale.
Like, we were iterating onthe material design system so quickly, and we couldn'tkeep a single source of truth with these othercomponent libraries.
It's not a perfect solution.
We're still working onmaking it faster and better, but we've foundthat that creates these sort of componentsthat look like they belong in the framework.
So any framework developerwho's working there, they look seamlesslylike they're a part of the environment.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: The onething that we struggled with with MaterialDesign Lite was there was a lot of blackmagic going on in the DOM.
So you check DeveloperTools, and there'll be, like, these random elements.
And that was, like, anopinionated decision so, you know, how do you go aboutdeveloping a new framework where you have to have anopinion-- there has to be, like, this is the baselineof what we're doing-- without impeding on, like, whatthe developer just wants to do? They just want this componentto work, or this widget, or whatever.
LYNN MERCIER: Yeah.
I try as much as possibleto avoid black magic.
And, like, whenever I'mreviewing any code that any of the designers on myteam are writing, we, like, try and avoid anything that's-- maybe it's a little hack,and it makes it slightly more performant-- butthe truth is, like, if we want to evolve thematerial design system, we need to be able tobuild on top of the code, and each layer ofthat code matters.
So we try and, like, steeraway from any black magic and just have thisone source of truth that works with all thecomponent libraries as much as possible.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU:In terms of, like, working withexisting frameworks, what's the relationship there? Because, like, React isa thing-- you have to-- it's the real world, right? LYNN MERCIER: Mm-hmm.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: Or likeWordPress is a thing.
Like, you have towork in that world.
LYNN MERCIER: Mm-hmm.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: So theremay be certain things that you can or can'tdo as a result of that.
LYNN MERCIER: Yeah.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: Like, formaintaining a framework where-- it's not Android.
It's not, like, a single-- LYNN MERCIER: Yeah.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU:--you have-- it's, like, the web is allabout relationships between different code bits.
I mean, how do you manage that? LYNN MERCIER: It gets reallytricky and really funny.
So we tend to prioritizethem in terms of what developers are already using.
So React is a great example.
There are a ton of codebases already in React-- it's super-popular.
So we want to prioritizethat one first, which is why we're making anMDC React library for React in particular.
But then there'sother libraries, like Angular andlike Polymer that we want to start using as well.
But we tend toprioritize them, again, based off whether or notdevelopers are already using them.
In terms of, like, keepingall that functioning-- and sometimes you endup, like, one framework wants it to do it oneway and another framework wants it to do another way.
It's just constantlycompromising.
Like, we work with thesedevelopers on the Polymer team, or we, like, talk tothe React community and try and figure out what'sthe right way to figure it out.
And we just sort of settleon the right compromise and stay there.
We do it as well with browsers.
So for example, we tendto develop first on Chrome because it's kind of thebest, and it works nice, but we have to support Safari,and Firefox, and Edge as well.
So we tend to testIE at the very end.
And we want it towork, but there's sort of, like, gracefuldegradation sort of things that happen.
As long as that happens, like,carefully and gracefully, then it tends to be OK.
And I think we do the samesort of thing with platforms.
You know, maybe itdoesn't perfectly work in everyplatform but as long as we can kind ofgracefully degrade that component in thatsituation, it'll work out.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: Yeah, Iknow the BBC have, like, a term that's calledcutting the mustard.
So basically, they willhave, like, a baseline where things have to work.
LYNN MERCIER: Yeah.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: Like, withthis, and if it doesn't work, or it doesn't supportthis technology, they're gonna say--you know what, you're not going to getthese experiences that we're designing.
I mean it-- how would youfeel about that as a concept? LYNN MERCIER: Yeah, we'vehad to use that already.
So there's newthings coming out-- material designed around shape.
And on the web platform,no matter what technology you're in-- like, what webplatform or what browser you're in-- rounded corners are really easy.
Like, cut-off corners? Impossible.
Just straight up impossiblewith the existing technology.
And so we kind of had to goback to our material design team and say, like-- look, we can update theCSS spec today in 2018, and then three years fromnow, our children's children will, like, have thisfeature, but we're not going to be able toimplement it right now.
So there are some featureswhere you just kind of have to draw the line and say,we can't do this feature without it beinga confusing story, without it being some sortof hack that no one would be able to use.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU:So how about SVG? I mean, I suppose whenit comes to animation, the challenge of SVG isthe performance 'cause-- LYNN MERCIER: SVGs, and thenthe shadows on top of them, and the scroll performanceunderneath those SVGs-- by the time you, like, transportall the browsers and all the situations wherethat component would be, it gets reallyconfusing quickly.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU:And very complicated.
LYNN MERCIER: Yeah,very complicated.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: That'squite interesting, because the conveyor belt isdesigner works on something, developer takes it, anddeveloper screams because there was no conversation.
I think that's one of thebiggest challenges developers face because, ifyou just talk to me, then I'll be able to explain,especially for designers who have no coding experience.
And I know we've spokenbefore, and you've mentioned stress testingthe design, which is a new concept for me.
LYNN MERCIER: It's my concept.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: How doesthat work, where you're stress testing the design? LYNN MERCIER: Imean, I think there's a limitation inDesigner Tools that make them want to forceeverything to sort of this pixel-perfect mock.
And it's gorgeous-- itcreates some gorgeous assets, but it doesn't always workin a real-world application.
And a developer'sjob is to create something that works in areal-world application, right? Ours is the stuff-- thecode that's running live.
And so many problems come froma design being pixel-perfect for one language, one screenwidth, one set of content.
And when you goto build that, you can build sort of adummy site quickly, but once you start populatingit with real content, all these problems come up.
And I think most designers,if you go and talk to them and say, like-- hey,I have this problem.
They'll help you.
They'll, like, show youhow to change the design and tweak it in this situation.
Like, they're very receptiveto that feedback-- they want to make their designs better.
But if you don't knowwho your designer is when you have thisproblem, then you just have this bug that says-- doesn't work in German.
Like, what do you do? You have no idea how to fix it.
So yeah, I think this conveyorbelt problem of designers who sort of, like,design something but then leave the projectand don't collaborate with the developers asthey're building it, it makes it reallydifficult for the developers to make the productbetter over time.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: So how do youthink designers can actually improve their process to makethat relationship better? Or more, is it reallydown to the most obvious? You just need to pairprogram, or pair together.
You have to talk to the person.
That's really the bestway to do it, so like-- LYNN MERCIER: Thatis the best way.
I mean, I think that can bereally difficult in certain-- if you don't have enoughtime and resources, sort of dedicate, like, one person,one designer, and one developer to every single feature.
I think there's waysin the middle to do it.
So for one, make sure thatyou know each other's names.
Like, if you'reremote, make sure you know how to deployyour code somewhere to staging so yourdesigner can work with it, and make sure your designerhas a way to send you, like, iterations on mocks.
Another sort of quick andobvious thing, I think, for designers is tointernationalize.
The moment you take allthe text from your mock, put it in Google Translate,put it back in the mock, and see what looks horrible-- MUSTAFA KURTULDU: German.
LYNN MERCIER: --like, yeah! German! Or even, like, CJK languages.
Just pick a language.
It doesn't matter ifyou translate it right.
Just, like, do thatfirst step because you're going to run into all thewidth and height problems that a developerwill run into live.
And I think it's goodfor designers, right? It helps you makeyour product better to get feedback aboutwhat sort of languages do I need to support.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU:And it's especially important inuser-generated apps where the content could be 10 pages,or it could be two lines.
LYNN MERCIER: Yeah! MUSTAFA KURTULDU:It's not like-- you always get the mock wherethere's, like, the name-- LYNN MERCIER: Yeah! MUSTAFA KURTULDU: --theavatar name's perfect.
LYNN MERCIER: Fits perfectly.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: Yeah, butwhat if the name's like, you know, four words long? LYNN MERCIER: Yeah.
MUSTAFA KURTULDU: Isthere anything else that they can do like the stresstest that wasn't just really-- LYNN MERCIER:Internationalization is a big one.
I think different screen widths,at least in your own web, is helpful as well,like making sure that the obviousbreakpoints work but also sort of smallerones or bigger ones.
But, yeah, it justcomes back to, like, be there when your developerruns into a real problem and help them fix that problem.
I think most developerswant to fix problems.
They want to code that out.
They just want to geton their headphones-- like, get the code outthat will fix the problem, but they don't know how toredesign the site, right? We're not going to-- ifyou make a developer guess how to design a site, we'regoing to guess really poorly.
So you need to helpus as designers.
SPEAKER: If you spentloads of time polishing your, like, amazingprototype, then you suddenly becomevery, like, you know, reticent to throw it away.
Kind of like it'syour baby, you're going to polish this too much.
And so that's dangerous,because then you're not using prototyping forprototyping's real purpose, which is to learn.
How I joined Google
There's a lot involved when it comes to building a good website.
You've got to start thinkingabout SEO from the ground up.
It can't be an afterthought.
The website needs to be safe and secure.
It needs to be fast.
It needs to look good.
It needs to be responsive so it looks good on a cellphone or a laptop or a tablet.
It's your bread andbutter of your business.
So you want to haveyour best foot forward.
You've got to have a great website.
1. Gestures are the new clicks
We forget how hard scrolling webpages used to be. Most users would painstakingly move their mouse to the right edge of the screen, to use something ancient called a ‘scrollbar’:
As a pro, you probably used a mouse wheel, cursor keys, or trackpad, but you were way ahead of most users.
In 2015 it’s far easier to scroll than it is to click. On mobile, you can scroll wildly with your thumb. To click on a precise target is actually more difficult — the complete opposite of what we’re used to on the desktop.
As a result, we should expect more and more websites to be built around scrolling first, and clicking second. And of course, that’s exactly what we’ve seen everywhere:
There’s every reason to expect this trend to continue as mobile takes over more of the market. Modern sites have fewer things to click, and much more scrolling. We’ll see fewer links, more buttons, bigger ‘clickable’ areas, and taller pages that expect to be scrolled.
Websites which spread their articles onto multiple pages will soon learn this lesson. Expect these to turn into longer single pages or even, like TIME magazine, into infinite scrolling pages:
It’s too early to know if the web will expand itself onto devices like watches, but if it ever does, you can bet it’ll be almost entirely driven by gestures.
2. The fold really is dead this time
Now scrolling is so cheap, and devices are so varied in size, ‘the fold’ is finally becoming irrelevant.
Designers are increasingly free to not cram everything at the top of a page. This leads to a design trend popularised by Medium — full-screen image titles, with no content visible until you start scrolling:
With tall, scrolling pages, designers have the chance to do what magazines have taken for granted for years: fill their pages with big beautiful images. In 2015 expect to see more designs that take up much more space — especially vertically — and a lot of larger imagery like this.
3. Users are quicker, websites are simplifying
Today every young adult is an expert web user. And even the amateurs are acting like pros: using multiple tabs, and swiping to go back a page.
The result is that everything is faster. And we’ve all learned to become impatient. If you want to make a mild mannered person explode with annoyance, just make their Internet really slow for a minute.
Now websites are forced not just to become faster (a technical problem), but to become faster to understand. Designs which slow the user down have the same impact on their audience as these websites which don’t load at all.
Simpler designs are easier to scan, which means they’re faster to appreciate. It’s easy to see which of these two designs is newer, and it’s because it’s the one that user’s can enjoy the fastest:
This is the biggest reason for the death of skeuomorphic design: users are more perceptive, less patient, and clutter only slows them down.
Apps put most websites to shame with super-minimal, beautiful interfaces. And they’re doing this because minimal interfaces perform better.
Flat design is just the beginning. The real trend is towards simplicity and immediacy, and we expect that to go further than ever in 2015.
4. The pixel is dead
On a desktop, a pixel was a pixel. You even had an idea of how many pixels made up an average inch: 72 dpi. Nowadays very few people know what a pixel is.
With responsive design, we’ve seen a move towards grids and percentages. But one huge area remains still unchallenged: bitmap images.
Almost all of the web is built with images that have half the resolution of a modern display, and they don’t scale. With Retina displays and modern browsers, the time is right for vector images to become more popular in 2015.
We can see this trend already happening with the font-based icons and Google’s Material design. The website loads faster and scale the icons to any size without losing quality. That makes them ideal for designers and modern web browsers.
The technology exists now, but it will take time for professionals to change their habits to create for higher quality displays. Once the average desktop display becomes Retina-grade (like the new iMac), we expect designers to follow suit.
5. Animation is back
If you want to make a website look dated, cover it with animated “Under Construction” GIFs and Flash animation. But several things are coming together to make animation a rising star in modern web design.
Flat design can end up looking too consistent, boring even. Animation helps a website to stand out and to pack more information into less space.
Mobile apps have redefined what a user expects. Mobile apps use motion to convey meaning, and websites are just starting to do the same.
New technologies like CSS animation make it easy to enhance designs without plugins, speed or compatibility issues. And Web Components (#6, below) will only accelerate this.
GIF animation is back, and surprisingly effective. You’ll notice this article makes extensive use of GIF animation (if it doesn’t, you should view this version), which has never been easier to create or share.
6. Components are the new frameworks
Web technology continues to get more complicated, and less semantic. Designers must embed messy code onto their pages for simple tasks, like including Google Analytics or a Facebook Like button. It would be a lot easier if we could just write something like this instead:
And we can with Web Components, which aren’t quite ready to be used by most designers yet. 2015 is looking like their year.
Google’s Material design is here, and it may just be what gets this movement started. Powered by Polymer, and supported by all modern browsers, it provides the rich animation and interaction components from Android apps, with simple tags like these:
If that takes hold, it wouldn’t be surprising to see more component based frameworks appear in 2015. Perhaps Bootstrap 4.0?
7. Social saturation and the rise of direct email
Social media has been a huge success for consumers, but many content producers aren’t so happy.
The problem is saturation. With billions of posts every day, Facebook learns the posts that users are most likely to enjoy and shows only those. Unfortunately that means over time, what you post is increasingly seen by a smaller percentage of your followers. (A problem you can solve, conveniently, by paying Facebook).
Social isn’t going away, but in 2014 we’ve seen a lot of prominent bloggers like Tim Ferriss move their focus away from social and into good old fashioned email lists. They’ve realised that email has one significant advantage over social: a much higher percentage of people will see what you send them.
I expect this post-social trend to continue into 2015, with the under-appreciated trend of Web Notifications (which work much like notifications in a mobile app).
Bonus non-prediction: CSS shapes
This cool technology won’t get noticed, except by designers. CSS shapes allow you to flow layout into shapes, like circles:
It’s incredibly cool, but until browser support is guaranteed, this is likely to be too risky to put time and effort into it you’d need almost two complete designs, for old and new browsers. And outside of designers, we don’t think many users would notice.
It is really cool though.
What to expect in 2015
In 2014 we saw mobile use overtake desktop, but the general public hasn’t caught up. Most organisations still commission a website to look good on their computer first and work on mobile second.
In 2015 that strategy is likely to look out of touch and unprofessional. As the mobile becomes the main device for browsing the web, “mobile-first” will become less of a buzzword and more of a requirement.
Flat design may be everywhere, but when you look beyond ghost buttons the real trend is that simpler sites are faster at gratifying users.
Simplicity is not just a fashion: it’s the future. Expect it to only continue.
It will become more and more common to embed animation into blog posts, and for motion to signify both premium quality (for those who can afford it) and to support the user experience.
Pixels and the fold will slowly be set aside making more room for scrolling and click-second experiences. Web Components will make it easier to deliver app-like experiences in our websites.
Right now you see the best of mobile app design appearing in web design. With enough time, the difference between an app and a website might almost entirely disappear.