TomsTechBlog.com

On Not Posting...

2009-11-09T09:31:00+00:00

So I haven't posted to this blog much lately.

At first I thought it was me. I've been really busy at work lately and the Holidays are coming up which presents an extra push for me (I tend to work a normal schedule during the Holidays as opposed to my normal 65 hour week so I have to work a little extra hard in preparation) But then I made a point of forcing myself to write on the next topic I found interesting.

And...nothing came along.

I don't know if it's the recession or if it's just a slow period but there just isn't a lot for me to post on. Most of what's going on in the tech blogosphere has boiled down to a few basic concepts...

Pre-Release products we know nothing about (Apple Tablet, Next Gen iPhone, CrunchPad and Android up until it was announced)
Personality Clashes with no philosophical issue at their root (see the most recent dustup with Michael Arrington and Zynga)
Posts that stretch out a simple point into multiple pages worth of posts (Yes, Google Wave is a little confusing but I don't think that trait justifies 4 or 5 posts)
Fluff Pieces (Why Facekbook will rule the Internet, 30 Predictions for Twitter's Future, etc...)

Honestly I don't know how to comment on any of those things. Which is why the blog's been dead lately. Hence this post. I'll be the first to admit this post is largely just a sign post for this blog saying "Hey look, this isn't an abandon Blog". For those who e-mailed thanks for the concern (and for reading at all which is humbling in itself)

I'll be around (hopefully more often) in the future.

The Indictment of One’s Own Social Media Contributions

2009-10-27T06:36:10+00:00

A story over at the dailytitan.com caught my interest (The Daily Titan is the student paper for Cal State Fullerton in Fullerton, CA). Here’s the gist…

Jessica Shekell, 21, a first-semester transfer sociology major at Cal State Fullerton was involved in a head-on collision at 3 a.m. while heading west on the eastbound Fast Trak Express Lane on the 91 freeway.

Shekell, who was alone in the car, was reportedly driving down the wrong side of the freeway when her vehicle struck another, killing 44-year-old Sally Miguel and 30-year-old Patricia Miguel. Sally Miguel died at the scene of the accident and Patricia Miguel died later from injuries at Western Medical Center.

The collision also resulted in major injuries to Sara Miguel, 11, and minor injuries to Mary Miguel, 15, who were sitting in the backseat of the family’s Chevrolet Silverado without seat belts on. Mary Miguel is currently being treated for moderate injuries at UCI Medical Center and Sara Miguel is currently being treated for major injuries at Western Medical Center, according to hospital spokespeople.

Now first let me say this is a tragedy all around. But what’s interesting here is that that Daily Titan article pointed to her MySpace page (here: http://www.myspace.com/82060729) and most of the comments have used that page to condemn Ms. Shekell.

Something that, in fairness, isn’t hard to do.

The page features several pictures of her holding a drink, socially drinking and in fact even posing with a bottle of Jack Daniels while in a car (and then consuming that bottle in that same car). It isn’t very hard to jump to the conclusion that this woman must have been drunk.

Put it this way. I show you the picture below and I tell you this woman caused an accident by swerving into ongoing traffic. What’s your first reaction?

My first reaction is that she was probably drunk and I don’t think that’s abnormal. But just to make the point imagine the same story but I show you this picture instead…

Being honest with yourself I think you’d be inclined to give her the benefit of the doubt (people fall asleep at the wheel for example). At least until more information was available.

That’s my point here.

Being truthful, I suspect this woman was drunk and she caused a horrible accident because of it. But I’m honest enough to admit I think that because of her page. That’s important because, as I’ve said repeatedly said on this blog, people take social media too lightly. Even if this woman wasn’t drunk she’s pretty much been indicted now and all based on MySpace photos you could find on the social networking site of a lot of 21 year olds.

People need to remember the world is not their personal friend. The world does not know you and you shouldn’t treat it as such. You shouldn’t share things with the world that you aren’t actually addressed to the public. Because when you do you risk creating a detractor at a time when you desperately need a defender (like in this case).

In the end I sincerely hope this girl is the drunk driver I think she is because thanks to her myspace page she’s facing the fallout of being a drunk driver even if she’s not.

Bing Scores Another Small Victory Against Google

2009-10-22T01:00:00+00:00

I don’t know about everyone else but these days Google Search rarely produces what I’m looking for on the first page.

In fact a lot of the time I get useless results. Answers.com appears on the first page of many of my queries but I can’t remember a time when I’ve actually seen an answered question. The same goes for message boards where the question is asked only to get no response. You’d think Google would be smart enough to recognize that at this point and keep it off the front page.

So Google isn’t perfect. Far from. But it’s so integrated into everyone’s behavior that most can’t stop using it. We’ve become accustomed to the results Google provides and adjusted our behavior accordingly (I very rarely click on links from Answer.com even though they still come up on the first page).

That instinct to “stay with what you know and adjust” is what really works against new competitors in the search space and it’s what makes this news so interesting…

In a stunning one-two punch, Microsoft will announce separate nonexclusive deals today with both Facebook and Twitter to integrate their real-time feed of status updates into the Bing search service.

According to sources, Microsoft (MSFT) digital head Qi Lu will announce the deal onstage in a few hours at the Web 2.0 Summit.

Now this would be a lot better if not for that pesky “nonexclusive” issue. But it still might be a windfall for Microsoft if they can stay exclusive for even a small amount of time.

Because people will adjust to anything competent and Bing is Microsoft’s first competent search engine. So if they can some how get people to use it for a little while they could pull a piece of Google’s audience over.

And what better way to get people to use Bing than to have it provide exclusive access to valuable information that Google doesn’t have?

Once a user comes over for that information they’ll likely stick around for their next query and the one after that (provided Bing can deliver relevant results). Before you know it Bing will have another small piece of the search market.

That, for now, is all they need.

You see Bing is almost certainly a long term goal for Microsoft. There’s no point in even dreaming of huge gains anytime in the next few years. But if Microsoft can continue to strike little blows against Google and take a small piece of search market each time they’ll establish themselves as a viable competitor. Once they become that they’ll have dispelled the illusion of Google being unbeatable and that’s when they can really start to compete.

Beating Google in search is definitely a journey of a thousand miles for Microsoft but this is one pretty large step in the right direction.

Addendum: Pesky, Pesky word...

Mere hours after today’s announcement that Twitter would now be integrated with Microsoft’s Bing search engine, Google has annouced that it too will include Twittter updates in its own search results.

Honestly I don't think this is as big a deal as most will. Facebook is the real prize for Bing. If they can keep some kind of exclusive deal with Facebook they'll see some benefits.

I Just Thought This Was Funny

2009-10-16T10:29:19+00:00

I got an invitation to Google Wave today and (as I sometimes do accidentally) I opened it using Internet Explorer. When I did I was treated to this message…

Google has clearly taken an “Anyone But Microsoft” stance. Safari would be understandable because it uses Webkit like Chrome but Firefox shows they went out of their way to support the Gecko engine while not supporting I.E.’s rendering engine.

Honestly, the more I use it the more I like Chrome so I can’t blame Google for trying to push IE users to a new browser.

XP Doesn’t Loom Large In This Case

2009-10-16T10:22:08+00:00

Joe Wilcox has an article over at Betanews where he outlines what he feels are the strategic issues surrounding Windows 7. In large part it’s an article designed to goad Mac fans (it’s even named “Mac fanboys should get a life and some Windows 7 common sense”). But once you get past that he makes what I feel is an erroneous point about Windows 7’s “true competition” (as he puts it).

He lists three “true” competitors: Windows XP, Pirates and Netbooks. The one I’m interested in is his point on Windows XP. He says…

Windows 7's biggest competitor will be Windows XP, which runs on about 80 percent of PCs, according to combined analyst reports. Microsoft's first challenge will be getting XP users to move up to Windows 7. Mac market share was 7.6 percent in the United States in second quarter, according to IDC. (Gartner and IDC should release Q3 preliminary numbers in the next couple of days.)

I’m not sure I would have keyed in on this if not for Mac lover John Gruber’s post which focused on that paragraph. He said…

I think Wilcox is spot-on that Windows 7’s primary competition is XP. Microsoft really does worry first about raw market share, and XP is the market leader by a long shot. Such comparisons against the Mac are apples-vs.-oranges, though, because Apple isn’t concerned about overall market share.

Sometimes I think certain points seem so obvious that people don’t actually think them through. This is one of those points. At first blush it seems like XP will be a big problem for Windows 7 but when you look at the actual facts you find that’s not the case.

Here are a few reasons for that…

1. You won’t be able to buy computers with XP anymore. The reason XP has been a thorn in Vista’s side is because Microsoft was forced to let PC manufacturers continue to sell XP (largely because Vista was such a disaster). But WIndows 7 won’t have that problem. I suspect Microsoft will allow manufacturers to still sell Vista on systems but who in their right mind would choose Vista?

2. XP is losing hardware support. Anyone who has maintained a large number of XP computers over the last couple of years will tell you that some specialized hardware is starting to come without XP drivers. Worse, many new systems are 64bit which adds another wrinkle. So even if someone pursued XP by installing it themselves they’re going to run into problems.

3. XP really isn’t sufficient. Again we come back to the problem of Vista. People stuck with XP because Vista was so bad but that doesn’t mean people have been blinded to the fact that XP is 8 years old and getting a little long in the tooth. All the security concerns, power management issues, and other issues are still there and are all still bugging most IT people. There was just no where to go up until now.

The bottom line is that PC users have been waiting for a decent upgrade. Not clinging to XP out of some love for it. Now that we have a worthwhile successor I suspect you’ll see a Windows 7 rollout that is faster than any previous version of Windows.

The Sidekick Users Strike Back (a.k.a. Tom’s a Big Meanie)

2009-10-16T10:18:20+00:00

First let me say this. If you haven’t either told me to “Go F**k Myself” or thought of telling me to “Go F**k Myself” at some point in the last 48 hours than this post doesn’t really apply to you. You should feel free to skip it.

To the rest of you (who probably aren’t reading this but what the heck) I have a message. In order to frame that message I would like to quote one of the lovely messages I’ve received over the past day. It said…

Hey F**k w*d,

Why don’t you mind your own F**k**g busines (her mis-spell, not mine - tom). Some of us are really upset about losing all our data and we don’t need you telling us you don’t give a c**p about it. Why don’t you just leave us alone and not be a j**k*ss about things.

Some people actually care about other people’s suffering but clearly you don’t so why don’t you just live your d**n life already and let us live ours.

With hopes that you go f**k yourself,

[Name Withheld]

In fairness I was the one who withheld her name. She was brave enough to put it out there with her real e-mail address (which was valid, I checked). So kudos to her on that.

That said here’s my message to the author and everyone else who wrote similar ones: I think you missed the point. To save myself from having to type any more than I have to and to prove I’m not back tracking I’m going to quote from the FAQ on my “about page” to make my point…

===Begin Quote===

“Why are you so mean? I don’t think I am mean but I know where the sentiment comes from.

Here’s the thing, I can be hard on people from time to time but that’s because I actually do care. It’s easy to just say “you’re great” to a person and then go on your way but to me that’s dishonest. That’s really saying “it doesn’t matter what you do it’s of so little importance that I’m just going to tell you how great you are no matter what”

I believe what people do is important and I believe that I have an obligation to tell them when their actions don’t deliver the results that their words are intending. So I'm not going to tell you how great you are unless you actually ARE great but I am willing to do everything in my power to help make you great. That's the sentiment I live by.

If that makes me look mean then so be it. I’d rather look mean and be comforted by the fact that I did the right thing than look nice and be the guy who just doesn’t give a damn. “

===End Quote===

And that is what I say to you. Believe it or not, I am the one who “gives a f**k” about your suffering. I am the one who is trying to make you see that you made a mistake so that you won’t do it again. The folks who are out there telling you it’s all big, mean Microsoft’s fault for losing your data are the ones that don’t care whether this happens to you again (and if you continue to not back up your data it will in fact happen to you again)

Sure, I’ll be the first to admit to the character flaw that is sarcasm and I’ll absolutely agree that my message would get across clearer without the sarcastic title. But that’s the world. No one’s perfect. That shouldn’t stop you from thinking through what I said and realizing I was trying to help you.

So in closing, and I say this with all the love in the world, but if you can’t see that I’m trying to help you than you can go f**k yourself. But I mean that in the nicest way possible.

Did Da Widdle Baby Woose All Her Data?

2009-10-13T07:14:00+00:00

A day or so ago I got an e-mail from a co-worker asking that I upvote an item he'd posted on Ycombinator's Hacker News Message Board.

Now this was surprising for me. I work with a couple people who frequent Hacker News and we've all pretty much decided never to upvote each other simply because there's a bias involved. So for him to request an upvote was a big deal.

The message he posted was in regards to this whole T-Mobile Sidekick situation in which Microsoft (who acquired Sidekick maker Danger) lost a lot of user data. Apparently Sidekick data is not permanently stored on the device. So there was some technical glitch on the server and any Sidekick users who turned off their device during that time lost all their data.

Anyway, back to my co-worker, this is the message he posted...

This probably (definitely?) makes me a jerk but I have to say it: They deserved it.

I'm sorry but in this day and age anyone trusting their data to a device that stores it exclusively on the server deserves what they get.

Some will say "the type of person who uses these devices isn't the type of person to understand where their data is located" but I say that's BS. We're in a data centric world now and I don't think it's asking that much for people to be aware of where their data is kept and to make sure they have some kind of "backup" guarantee.

To Anyone Downvoting This: Let me ask you one question. If someone without a seatbelt gets hit by a drunk driver does the fact that the accident's the drunk driver's fault mean it was ok for them not to wear a seatbelt? Or can someone be responsible for their own irresponsibility even though the damage was caused by a party that was more to blame?

When I first read it I thought his post was maybe a little too blunt. But I essentially agreed with the sentiment and didn't think he deserved to get taken to the cleaners for it (when I saw the thread it was at a -5 rating).

Still, I thought he was a tad harsh until I saw this news item from CNet's Ina Fried. She quotes several sob stories from users who lost their data during this Sidekick debacle.

The one that really set me off was this one from "Rachel" (last name held by request)...

Unfortunately I was unaware that my phone was at risk during this whole "data service disruption." There were a couple of text messages sent out last week from Tmobile apologizing for any inconvenience during this time period, but not once did it plainly state in a text to NOT POWER DOWN YOUR DEVICE, DO NOT ALLOW THE BATTERY TO RUN OUT and/or DO NOT REMOVE YOUR BATTERY. Instead it advised users to checkout their webpage for more information. At the time I was having no problems with my data and therefore disregarded the "sorry for the inconvenience" text and carried on using my phone as normal, and not bothering to check out the tmobile webpage.

Well, the next day my battery somehow died while I was at work (still unsure how that happened as it was charged the night before as it always has been) and after charging the phone at home my phone powered on easily enough, but without any of my personal information on it any longer. So I turned it off again, pulled out the battery for a few minutes, and then reassembled it all and tried again. Still no luck.....photos, address book (250+ contacts!), events, notes, etc.....all gone. It wasn't until this happened that I started to investigate the problem and found this in huge letters across the top of the main sidekick page (t-mobile.com/sidekick): "Sidekick customers, during this service disruption, please DO NOT remove your battery, reset your Sidekick, or allow it to lose power." Along with a note explaining they were trying to recover the data, etc.

Now it seems that all my information may be lost for good. It's infuriating.

So...This woman got a warning from T-Mobile , she chose to completely disregard that warning, and now she's mad because there were negative consequences?

Come On!

Now don't get me wrong. I'll be the first to admit I've ignored similar messages in the past. I'm just as guilty of that. But the difference between me and "Rachel" is that I would take responsibility for my actions if ignoring those messages led to a negative result. Because in the end I did choose to ignore an explicit warning.

(Again, the group at Microsoft/Danger that let this happen are world class idiots who deserve a ton of blame, just not all the blame)

Which brings me back to my co-worker's experience on Hacker News. What amazed me about the replies he got was that there were a lot of people defending those Sidekick users who lost their data. Saying they shouldn't be responsible for backing up their data and that they deserved no blame for any of this. That bothers me a great deal.

Have people just completely divorced themselves from results? The actions of these people who lost their data have already ended in disaster. Regardless of how bad or stupid Microsoft is that doesn't change the fact that all these people would still have their data if they'd just backed it up somewhere. Instead of entrusting the sole copy of it to a company who gave them no guarantees whatsoever in regards to data integrity.

Bottom Line: Children expect someone else to take care of their problems for them. Adults are supposed to know enough to safeguard those things which they value.

2nd Bottom Line: The cloud does not solve everything. You can not just trust the cloud to protect, backup, and safeguard your data. It's your job as the owner of that data to make sure you have it somewhere else in case there is a disaster. Because if something like this happens it may very well be the cloud's fault but it's you who will have lost your data.

Drama 2 Where R U?

2009-10-05T01:21:00+00:00

When I started this blog I intended it to be a technical one. Not "commentary on the day's tech events" which is what it has become. The reason for the evolution was largely based on my admiration of two bloggers in particular. Drama2 of the Drama 2.0 show and Loren Feldman of 1938 Media. These two defied the blogosphere's group think and, imho, told it like it was. So they've always been very important figures in my blogging life.

Six months ago today one of them disappeared.

Actually "disappeared" doesn't quite do the incident justice. After a bizarre Twitter post on April 4th the Drama 2.0 web site changed dramatically. The next day's post was entitled "Kim Kardashian vs. Lamborghini: Who Has the Smoothest Ride?" and the site's header had changed to feature porn pictures mixed in with provocative celebrity shots. It now sported the tagline "Celebrity drama has never been this sexy" and was written by "nikolay" whoever that is.

For the next week items popped up regularly sporting headlines like "Lady Gaga Has An Ass To Go Gaga Over" and "Spencer Pratt Pumps Gas Before Pumping Heidi Montag". This continued just long enough to confirm this was no prank on Drama2's part.

Then, in another bizarre twist, the site went dark. The next post appeared about 6 weeks later on May 28th and proclaimed "[Cameron] Diaz doesn’t have the freshest face" but "that doesn't mean she looks bad from the back". Since that cutting edge news item the site has only managed to put up 3 more posts (though bizarrely the last item was posted a mere 3 days ago so it's still active to some extent)

In the end a site with one of the best contrarian bloggers on the web has now become a half ass celebrity site that posts once a month or so.

Why I still don't know (and if Google is to be believed neither does anyone else). Since Drama2 was anonymous there's not really a way to track him down. Even if there was he clearly doesn't want to be found and has clearly chosen not to explain his actions.

The sad part is Drama2's still proving his worth to this day. With one exception his "2009 Predictions" have been eerily accurate so far. I don't think I'm going out on a limb when I say keen insight like that is worth far more than yet another place to get a video of Kim Kardashian having sex (I know there are at least several thousand people out there who agree with me)

I'm not as high profile as Drama2 was nor am I as talented yet I've taken a good share of verbal beatings on this blog. I assume he saw even worse and I have to imagine that was part of the reason he disappeared from "the scene" (though this post makes me wonder if that's true). But it's sad because the blog world desperately needs him. Anyone who has taken an anthropology class will tell you most people line up behind the loudest voice which leads to a system of group think based around the most powerful people in a social structure.

No where is that more evident than in the blogosphere which means no group needs a talented contrarian more desperately than the tech blogs. I don't know where Drama2 went or if he still keeps up with tech blogs but if he should ever come across this I hope he knows how much the blogoshphere has lost without him and how many of us out here still hope for his eventual return.

Being Scott Guthrie: How I Would Have Announced WebSiteSpark

2009-09-29T06:27:00+00:00

The main criticism I’ve gotten on my last post is that I didn’t really say what I’d do better. This post is to try to alleviate that. I’m going to write, very roughly, what I would have tried to say. But before I do let me just make my point right here: Announcing a product is about selling that product, if you don’t sell it to your intended customers then you’re just wasting the effort.

That said, below is my very quickly written rough draft of the points I’d try to hit if I were Scott Guthrie making that post. In italics is me explaining why I’d hit those specific points.

Hi,

Here at Microsoft we have two goals. First, to make great products that people want to use. Second, to convince developers like yourself that our products are worth using.

Yes, it seems a little cheesy. I’ll admit that. But that’s sort of the point. What you’re trying to do here is to (a) humanize yourself while (b) lowering yourself to a level below the person you’re trying to sell to (the last sentence is basically a socially acceptable way of bowing and saying “we’re not worthy”). No one ever closed a deal by trying to be cooler than the person they’re selling to.

Today we’re introducing a program called WebsiteSpark which we hope will accomplish the second goal. It’s basically a way for you to get free development software, support and business resources from Microsoft. In giving you this we hope to prove to you that our tools are not only worthy of your business but the best available tools for what you want to accomplish.

Honestly, I personally would prefer not to reveal what the program is this quickly and if it was a one-on-one sale I wouldn’t. But people on the web tend to get annoyed if you don’t get to the point quickly which necessitates putting this info out there up front. Again notice the subdued tone. If you’re trying to win new customers you’re coming in at a disadvantage because they’re already using something else. So you don’t want to get in their face because that will push them back into the arms of your competitor.

Before getting to what software this program specifically includes I want to point you to a few studies. These studies were conducted by independent agencies and compared our development tools to other leading tools in the space.

We’ve also prepared some cost analysis so you can see how much you’d save in implementation costs between the WebsiteSpark Program and a Linux/Apache based solution.

This is the crux of my argument. My biggest problem with how ScottGu introduced this program is that he didn’t give any reasons why people would want to switch to Microsoft tools. He just said “we’re giving them away for free" which again, to me, says “we think you’re stupid enough to jump to our platform based solely on the word free".” That’s not the way to start a new business relationship.

If you’ve come this far in the post we hope you are at least considering Microsoft Development Tools for your next project. Remember, we’re not asking you to switch this very second. Just give us a chance and see what we can offer. That’s what the WebSiteSpark program is all about. Giving you a “no money down” way to try our tools and see what we have to offer.

Speaking of which, let’s go over what WebSiteSpark Includes:

I’m not going to put the list here but I did want to make a point about the list. In it he makes no attempt to sell the actual products. He just lists them as if people who aren’t Microsoft Developers are going to know exactly what they are and what advantages they represent (which is unlikely with products like Expression Blend that aren’t commonly known among open source developers).

When you’re trying to sell someone on something you have to give them all the information they’ll need to make a decision. Don’t expect them to go hunt down the details themselves.

One last thing I would have added…

One last note to our friends in the development community that advocate for other tools. We understand a lot of you look on Microsoft with suspicion. We accept that and even own up to causing it to a large extent. We’re not asking you to trust us right off the bat. But again, the tools are free. So why not try them out and over the next few years see how we act towards you. See how we’re open to starting a dialogue about your concerns and how we’re willing to work with you to address those concerns. If you do I think you’ll find we’re a trustworthy partner to have.

And that’s about it. I actually don’t have anything on the disclaimer section. It’s fine as disclaimers go so this ends my little virtual post. I’m not saying what I put above is great and if I was actually making the post I’d spend days going over the exact wording to make sure I really nailed it. But hopefully it at least makes the point that announcing something is about selling it not just about telling people of it’s existence.

If you don’t sell the thing you might as well not release it at all.

Dear Developers, We Think You’re Idiots, XOXO…Microsoft

2009-09-24T21:38:00+00:00

Let’s get one thing straight up front. I’m a Microsoft developer. Proud MSDN Universal Subscriber. Etc… I’m not some Ruby on Rails guy set out to bust Microsoft’s chops. I like Microsoft Development tools.

But honestly, this is just obnoxious. From Scott Guthrie (Vice President of Microsoft’s Developer Division)…

I’m excited to announce a new program – WebsiteSpark – that Microsoft is launching today.

WebsiteSpark is designed for independent web developers and web development companies that build web applications and web sites on behalf of others. It enables you to get software, support and business resources from Microsoft at no cost for three years, and enables you to expand your business and build great web solutions using ASP.NET, Silverlight, SharePoint and PHP, and the open source applications built on top of them.

Free software? What could be wrong with that?!? Well, this…

WebSiteSpark provides software licenses that you can use for three years at no cost.

I have a lot of friends who are independent developers and who use RoR, Python, et al. I have had many, many, MANY heated debates on their choice of development tools vs. my choice of development tools. In those debates the one thing that’s clear is they sincerely believe in an “economic disparity” between how much it costs to develop for Microsoft platforms and how much it costs to develop for LAMP (which technically stands for Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP but for the purposes of this post I’m redefining the P to stands for PHP/Ruby/Python/et al…)

That’s the problem with WebSiteSpark. It’s essentially a trap. The impression Microsoft is giving makes it seem like a very thinly veiled attempt to trick developers into using Microsoft technologies because then they’ll be stuck with them. From lower in Mr. Guthrie’s post…

WebsiteSpark is a 3 year program. There is no obligation to continue to use any of the software after the three years is over, and there are no costs for the three years other than a $100 program fee at the end of the three years.

At the end of the three years, WebsiteSpark participants can optionally choose to purchase all of the software in the WebsiteSpark program via a $999/year package. This includes 3 copies of VS Professional, 1 copy of Expression Studio (including Blend and Sketchflow), 2 copies of Expression Web, and 4 processor licenses of Windows Web Server 2008 and 4 processor licenses of SQL Server Web edition that can be used for production deployment.

See, that comes across as disingenuous to me and that’s the problem. I’m not against the WebSiteSpark program per se. I think a lot of the “economic disparity” between developing LAMP apps and developing Microsoft apps is imagined and I think $999 a year for three team members is actually a pretty good deal.

But don’t pretend people can just use Microsoft products for three years and then drop them with no consequence (as if all the products designed in that time won’t need to be updated). Don’t throw out “no obligation” as if it means anything in the grand scheme of things.

Bottom Line: Free shouldn’t be the selling point here. The selling point needs to be “Developing with Microsoft products really is cheaper than developing LAMP solutions and we’ll prove it to you. Here are some free products to try it out” That’s the case Microsoft needs to make to independent developers. Not “we’ll give you free products.” Ideally the message Microsoft needs to get across is “our products will make your job easier and make your projects cheaper even without the free products”. Only then will they start to woo developers away.

Addendum: To Mr. Guthrie, if you should stumble upon this in your web travels, please fix your Silverlight tutorial. The WaterMarkedTextBox was removed from the product so it’s really annoying to find it used in your beginners tutorial. Sorry to call you out in public but I used said tutorial months ago (thanks btw) and this issue was already there. And it still hasn't been fixed. Given the main Silverlight site points to your tutorial as a starting point that's bad for all of us who believe in the product.

Oh I.E., How Pitiful You’ve Become

2009-09-23T02:25:20+00:00

Well, the good news is Internet Explorer finally supports the <canvas> element (a huge personal pet peeve of mine). At least, sort of…

Google just announced the launch of Chrome Frame, a new open-source project that will allow Chrome's rendering engine to run within Microsoft's Internet Explorer 6,7, and 8. This plugin, which is available now, will give developers the option to ask users if they would prefer to switch to the Chrome rendering and JavaScript engine. Users simply continue to use Internet Explorer and the switch will be completely seamless, with no noticeable changes to the user interface

How pathetic is it when your competitors have to add basic features to your product?

Keep in mind, in the case of the <canvas> element EVERY OTHER BROWSER supports it at this point and has for at least a year. IE was the sole hold out. Not only had they held out so far but they refused to guarantee they’d implement it in IE9.

It’s ridiculous.

When Microsoft reformed the IE team (after disbanding it a few years earlier) the promise was they’d restore IE to a first class browser. 2 versions later that’s yet to happen. While on the other end of things Microsoft doesn’t seem to do adequate testing of other browsers in regards to their corporate products like Sharepoint.

So they’re basically disappointing their customers on both sides.

Hopefully having Google make a fool of them (yet again) will be the kick Microsoft needs to get IE back in the browser war. Because right now it’s just an embarrassing afterthought that corporate customers are forced to use.

Apple: The Business Solution From Hell

2009-09-16T21:30:00+00:00

Yesterday Galan Graham reported the new iPhone update (3.1) was preventing him from connecting this his Exchange server.

If you're like me, you probably ran the iPhone OS 3.1 update late Friday along with all the other Mac OS X updates. And perhaps, like me, you found your device no longer syncing to your company's Exchange 2007 Server. I, for one, assumed something had changed on the back end. After all, a dot-one update is a bug fix, so there shouldn't have been anything major to watch out for. But I learned Monday it was the update itself that was to blame.

What Mr. Graham would go on to discover is that in version 3.0 the original iPhone and iPhone 3G falsely reported support for Hardware Encryption to the Exchange Server (neither device actually supports Hardware Encryption). Apple, without warning, fixed this bug which left all the iPhone and iPhone 3G customers out in the cold (the 3GS does in fact support hardware encryption so it still works).

Two things to note here…

1. The two older iPhones have been claiming to support encryption they actually don’t for the last 3 months. Therefore exposing user data (at least to a limited extent).

2. Apple then “fixed” this without warning which cut off all those users (again without warning) and gave them no way to reconnect (other than to convince their IT departments to lower the security requirements or downgrade their phone).

At first, I didn’t comment on this. I wanted to see how Apple would respond before I did. Today, courtesy of CNet’s Jim Dalrymple, that response came…

“iPhone OS 3.1 is working properly with Exchange Server 2007," Apple representative Natalie Harrison told CNET News. "We added device encryption information to the data that can be managed by IT administrators using Exchange Server 2007. The policy of whether to support iPhone 3G, in addition to iPhone 3GS, which always has on-device encryption, on Exchange Server 2007 is set by the administrator and can be changed at any time.”

So no apology, no admission of guilt and honestly no evident shame whatsoever.

This is why Apple will never be a trustworthy business partner. Business professionalism is all about taking the needs of your partners, vendors and customers into account and trying to act in a way that is the most beneficial for the entire supply chain. Because good businesses realize that harming any part of that equation will eventually come back and harm them.

Apple simply doesn’t seem to care. For consumers that have no real NEED from their computer I suppose that’s ok. But for companies that require their computers to get actual work done I can’t see trusting a company that acts in this way.

Addendum: Despite what the last couple posts might indicate I haven't turned "anti-Apple". I just realize their hubris limits them in some important areas and as their popularity grows I think it's important to point out what applications they shouldn't be trusted with.

Pride

2009-09-13T02:36:00+00:00

In an article entitled "Apple Flubs iPod Event, Marketing Changing?" Bnet's Erik Sherman wonders why everyone seems to have glossed over Apple's most recent announcement of a camera enabled iPod Nano and a new focus on iPod Touch gaming.

The new products were “a snooze fest for any Apple fans expecting new, must-buy products”. People knew about the new products coming out and were disappointed when the expected video camera addition to the iPod touch didn’t appear. Instead, the video capability is going into the new iPod Nano. Roughly 40 minutes into Jobs’s presentation, Chris Nuttall from the Financial Times live blogged, “I’m sorry, but can we get to some news” and later added, “so yes, the nano looks great, nice iTunes improvements, but underwhelming otherwise”.

Have you ever been disappointed by someone? I mean really let down. And they try to talk to you or explain what happened but you just tune them out because you really don't want to hear it at that point.

To a lesser extent I think that's what happened to Apple.

Now I'm going out on a limb here and assuming Apple meant to have a camera integrated into the iPod Touch to introduce. Manufacturers were already making cases with holes for a camera, a teardown of the device shows an empty place where the camera should be, etc...

Plus the fact that Steve Jobs, a master of spin, couldn't even come up with a good explanation as to why there's not a camera seals the case for me.

At least on the high end the 3rd Generation iPod Touch was meant to have a camera. But when the announcement came, it didn't. Anyone who reads rumor sites probably knows why that is. There was a problem with the camera module that made it impossible to get out the door in time. That's perfectly reasonable. These things happen. But here's where Apple went wrong: They let their pride get the best of them.

Apple could have come on stage and said "Look, we wanted to have a camera in the high end iPhone but there were technical issues. So we're going to hold the high end model back a few months and instead only release these new, lower cost models."

At that point everything's forgiven. People understand technical issues occur and are unavoidable. No one's going to hold it against them. But instead Apple, by staying silent, took responsibility for it themselves. They said "We didn't include a camera in the touch and that's by design" which is where everything went wrong.

By having too much pride to admit a technical glitch Apple disappointed their audience and caused that audience to tune out everything else they said.

Because of that Apple basically threw away a valuable marketing opportunity and created a bunch of negative coverage to boot. It's a rare misstep from a company that's built its business around image but a good lesson for all of us. There's a reason Pride is considered the most deadly of sins.

On the Games...Mr. Sherman's other point is somewhat valid but I think the "iPod is a game device" meme is more of a marketing push than it is a company direction. There's a lot more to being a game machine than just showing off cool games on your platform. There's purchasing exclusive games, paying the developers of quality games to port to your platform, etc... Apple will have some success in games because it's much cheaper to develop for the iPod Touch than it is to develop for Sony or Nintendo but I wouldn't put them in the same league as far as the game market is concerned.

Since it seems to end up there every 5 minutes anyway maybe Carol Bartz should just keep her foot in her mouth permanently.

2009-09-11T16:44:23+00:00

Carol Bartz, still the relatively new CEO of Yahoo, went on record today saying she would have given the company to Microsoft for their original asking price. Here's the quote...

If Carol Bartz were Yahoo's CEO when Microsoft was offering $33-$34 per share for the company last year, would she have taken the deal that Jerry Yang shot down?
"Well, sure. You think I'm stupid? I mean, let me see... $15, $34, yeah, I think so," she said on CNBC this morning.

Now I don't disagree with her. I think Yahoo should have taken the deal. But it's just not something you say at this point. Let me explain...

As much as I like to think of myself as a "just get the job done" type of guy my experience in software development has taught me a very important lesson. Great software products only happen when those who are building them feel passionate about the job.

Because there's not just one way to develop software. Architects, Engineers, and other professions that build things tend to have a blueprint for what they're doing. An Architect, for example, knows where to put the doors and windows based on specifications given to them by the person initiating the job. An Engineer knows where to place components based on heat distribution. And so on...

Software developers on the other hand are out in the wilderness. There are a million different opinions regarding proper UI design and proper coding technique. So a software developer has to be dedicated to sift through those techniques and determine how to do a job properly. At the same time it's very easy for a software developer to just "phone it in" designing a program as they go along.

Which is why it's imperative to make your software designers feel like they are doing something important. Because that's how you get them to put forth the effort required to do it right.

Ms. Bartz statements do just the opposite of that. By saying she would have jumped at the acquisition offer she's basically framing the company as something she'd get rid of all together if she could. She's lessening it in the eyes of the world by representing it as an acquisition target rather than a company that's actually trying to accomplish big things. That sends a message to her developers that basically says "I don't think all that much of you or this company"

That's not a message that will bring out the best in her developers.

What do they say about people who forget the past?

2009-09-10T12:52:00+00:00

*** Sorry for the double post. SOMEONE (*cough*me*cough*) meant to delete a spam comment and instead deleted the whole entry **

Techcrunch has a piece by guest author Josh Fraser which deals with the differences between two emerging "Push" based technologies, RSSCloud and PubSubHubBub. I agree with just about everything he says but one quote really bothered me...

Dave Winer deserves the credit for coming up with the idea long before anyone else. In fact, the <cloud> element was added to the RSS 2.0 specification in 2001, but has only recently been revived (largely in response to the interest in PuSH).

Now I'm not trying to take away from Mr. Winer's decision which was a good one. But he wasn't the first to think of it and I feel looking back at who was first teaches us something.

That's why someone should mention both Internet Explorer and Netscape had Push technology integrated with version 4.0 of their respective browsers. That was in 1997, a full 2 years before the first version of RSS was even published.

In truth RSS was inferior to both Microsoft's Active Channel and Netscape's Netcaster technology but neither company could agree to support the other so push technology fell to the wayside. Now it's 12 years later and we're finally working our way back to technology that was introduced in 1997.

The reason for those lost 12 years is simple: Neither Microsoft nor Netscape would compromise. So both technologies disappeared and "Pull" technology jumped in to fill the void.

As we enter into yet another format war (PubSubHubBub vs. RSSCloud) I hope people look to the past and realize how much of a detour can be caused by disagreement. 12 years is a lot of time to lose in the technology industry and it would be sad to see us lose another 12 because of petty squabbling.