Recently in Techobabble Category

Not a terribly interesting title, I know, but what can I say? I believe Microsoft mangled out an Enterprise Project Management ecosystem based on Project, and doing a fantastically bad job of it.  Project is a great tool, but whoever came up with the idea of using Project as a frontend to a time reporting infrastructure was really desperate to cobble things up together.  Doubtless it’s a move towards the adage “users are familiar with the interface, so that helps lower the learning curve”, but boy did they make a mistake with this one.

I think reuse is overrated, especially if you’re trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.  Creating projects in EPM is nothing like creating real activities and task for real projects that you need to show to clients.  Using EPM forces the PM to do the work twice – once for EPM, and the other for the one that you really use in your day-to-day.

This is, how do I put it, insane.

On paper it makes sense.  Truly.  An integrated approach to having the Project Manager’s plan be tied to billing and time reporting.  In fact, it’s the only clean way.  The problem lies in execution.  If Microsoft wanted to pursue this area, why can’t EPM read the project plans that *I* create, rather than forcing me to create an abstract plan just to fulfill the requirements of tying milestones to billing and invoicing, and to time reporting?

Did I mention that the interface is monstrously complex?  There are so many things to remember about creating project plans for EPM.  Part of the power of Project is its flexibility in allowing a PM to create a plan in the manner that best suits the project.  I create milestone tasks for EPM!

I understand that it’s possible that my organization may not be using EPM ‘properly’, in that there exists the possibility for EPM to do everything I’ve just complained that it should do.  Still, the mechanics of implementing a project in this interface seems too much liked a tacked-on approach. It’s like retrofitting a car with jet engines to make it fly, simply because the pilot ‘knows how to drive a car’,

Oh, and the web interface to enter clocking?  Let me just say that AJAX has existed since Gmail came on the scene in 2004. It’s 2009 now and EPM Web has no AJAX.  Why? 

Well, actually, we've already seen early demos before, but this time a fuller keynote was presented by Google, and Android looks to be coming along just fine. I'm really excited about this new platform, and I hope it has learned from the mistakes of all those that has come before it - including Symbian and Windows Mobile.

I'm looking for application ideas for Android. Anyone want to suggest something I could do? What would you like your mobile phone to be able to do?

I've read Joel on Software for a long while now, and while I've never read *everything* he has done, I've read enough to be quite a fan of his writing, and clear explanations and lucid, pragmatic views. A resource every software developer should read.

But his latest is simply outstanding. In Martian Headsets, he explains about web standards in a way that's understandable, exact, balanced, and above all, entertaining. Lays out the reason why IE8, the next version of the predominant web browser in the world, is in a unique position to change the world (and I'm only slightly exaggerating), what issues confront the browser development team and why no matter what it does, it may not be able to correct the flaws compounded upon in years and years of web development.

At the heart, it discusses the decision that every developers will face at one point or another in their career: to do the right thing, or to make it work.

It's fascinating reading, and may be the single best piece of technical exposition I have ever read on any subject in IT, much less web standards. Even if you're not technically inclined, I'd recommend a read: you'll learn about web standard, if nothing else.

It's articles like these that make me really excited about the future. I'm a huge proponent of mobile technology, about how the latest and greatest in the tech world will make us more connected, more enabled, but without the bulk that today's laptops impose on us.

This article by Computerworld focuses on some concept notebooks, which is touch screen, soft keys, and light. I don't think there will be a one device that does everything anytime soon, especially if we're talking about the amalgamation of notebook and mobile phones, for instance, but the convergence continues to happen at a frantic pace. It will soon be silly to own a desktop computer - everything that stays in the house would be more like a server, and connected and controlled via the TV set in a home media setup. Actual computing work? On a laptop, of course!

Very interesting look in the future.

I had planned to write a dazzling defense of ebooks for years now, but had never had the chance to really sit down to get it done (I know exactly how long I've been meaning to do it because I keep track of almost everything in my organizer).

I'll get to it, as I've picked up the writing again recently, what with the recent surge of interest in debating about ebooks with the release of Amazon's Kindle. I'll post my thoughts on ebooks readers later, but a quick sideswipe is I think the Sony Reader looks much better than the Kindle, although feature-wise it does lose out to Amazon's device. I'll get to them later.

But most of all, I'm just wondering why ebook readers are not really sold here. Ever since the Rocket e-Book Reader was announced oh-so-long ago, I've been pining for one, but being in an out-of-the-way country does hinder shipping and handling. I want to see it in a store. I want to hold it, be impressed, be blown out of the water, be simply mesmerized by the physical presence. I can order it online, but then there's this agonizing wait, and the hope that the shipping doesn't shatter the precious cargo. Then of course there's the issue of being able to buy ebooks for these devices from outside of the States. I've not hopped over to Amazon yet, but like iTunes Store, the Sony eBook Store doesn't cater to us over here.

This is like opening a can of worms, I had intended only to write a little, but here I am being compelled to ensure there's no confusion on the technologies.

I must clarify that for these dedicated ebook readers, the users are typically forced to go to the respective vendor's ebook stores to purchase their ebooks, which is in a proprietary format that will only play on that particular device (i.e. Kindle only reads ebooks purchased from Amazon's ebook store, Sony's only from their store, and they are *not* interchangeable). For generic ebook reader software, however, such as those which can be installed on devices such as PDAs (for example Microsoft Reader, Palm Reader or Acrobat Reader), then the ebooks may be purchased from any vendor that peddles in these respective formats. This is precisely the reason that if you purchase a Sony Reader here, you'll have problems getting ebooks because the Sony eBook Store, which is your sole avenue for ebook purchasing, doesn't sell to those outside of the States.

As it stands right now, I'm pretty satisfied with my current ebook reader, my Dopod 838Pro aka HTC TyTN. It's small, and I carry dozens of books with me as long as I have my mobile. It's not ideal, but it'll do for now.

I'll be back with the whole ebook mess.

By no means breaking news, but Google's foray into the mobile platform is as exciting as opening a pack of potato chips and finding out there are more than 6 chips inside (okay, more exciting than that).

Android has the backing of a gigantic brand name that has the potential of bringing solidarity to the industry that even Windows Mobile, Symbian and Blackberry couldn't achieve. Add to that that the carrot that Google has devised - a 10 million bucks developer challenge to develop exciting new applications for Android.

This is level opportunity for anyone with brilliant ideas to step forward and stake a claim in the mobile arena. That's what I really love about the Internet, those who can see the opportunities can seize them and make of them what they will, regardless of where in the world they might be.

So, an opportunity to develop for Android, and to win large doughs of cash. I have ideas, but do not have the primary resource for the endeavor, the most precious commodity of them all: time. I'm eager to learn up the platform, and I think it's an extremely interesting opportunity. This is akin to the new beginnings of the Web, where people can build the anything remotely useful (and doesn't suck), and pretty much gain a huge chunk of the market share simply by virtue of being the first.

Microsoft has an exciting development environment and platform in Windows Mobile. But Microsoft doesn't have the same sort of clout (for the lack of a better word) to generate the same excitement that Google can. The notion that Google can do no wrong and their tendency to open up previously closed platforms makes Android look like a double-layered chocolate moist cake with caramel top - extremely tempting.

Personally, even evaluating the platform against other mobile platforms would be educational - sometimes even ten millions dollars cannot guarantee mass migration of developers from established players.

So I'm excited, and although my chances of winning the $10M is as remote as Michael Jackson turning black again, I think the journey would be interesting. Do you think a calculator with coloured keys be a $10M-winning candidate?

I wanted to write about the little episode concerning Ursula Le Guin's little outburst on the internet over her little piece in Ansible. Unfortunately, a little jaunt to an Apple store after dinner brought my attention to a tiny little thing called iPod Touch.

If you don't really follow the endless rollouts of consumer electronics and geeky gadgets, you may not have heard that Apple released a phone called iPhone. This little thing has been greeted by the general gadget/techy public as the best thing since someone dared to split open and tasted durians However, due to partner deals and other business shenanigans, this baby is not available outside of the US (for now).

However, Apple has seen fit to revamp its generation of iPods, and have introduced what is really the iPhone without the phone - called the iPod Touch. And this had no trouble reaching our shores.

And I got to play with it today.

Initial impression: breathtaking! I won't show you any pictures (I didn't take any, and I didn't feel like pissing people off by image linking them here), but I will direct you to Apple's home page and the pictures in Engadget here to see for yourself what I'm talking about.

Slimmer than a catwalk model who eats once a week, more stylish than Gwen Stefani ever could be, sexier than [insert whatever turns you on], it's a lovely lovely piece of technology.

However, I've always stated that I will not buy iPods, and this guy does nothing to sway me (although it came pretty damn close). It's still too expensive. We can't use iTunes here, which takes away a lot of the functionality that it otherwise will give to iPod owners. I can get similarly spec'ed media players for a much lesser price. There are more than a couple of things that I can nitpick about this device - it's not perfect!

However, there is nothing out there like its user interface, which is beautiful. it is more than the sum of its parts. I suppose for a fellow with loads of cash to spare, and is looking for something that will literally turn people's heads, you cannot go wrong with the iPod Touch.

Did I mention I was blown away with the iPhone by Apple? The design was astounding, with functionality in a lovely form factor.

Here comes another upstart to the throne: Upstage by Samsung. Dual sided beauty offering similar features to the iPhone, including the form factor. And it comes earlier too.

We do love it when companies keep one-upping each other to seduce the consumers. It is during times like these that I keep thinking how left out we are over here when the big guns over there flaunt their toys while the rest of us here drool.

Ah well. Good things come to those who wait.

Personally, I'm simply waiting for the same wow-like form factor design applied to a useable PDA phone device. I really really like to do whatever I want with a phone, including email and reading ebooks.

I know this isn't a non-tech piece, but hey, I've reached a conclusion! Reaching a conclusion of any kind is a monumental achievement for me, so much celebration should ensue.

Anyway, after much consideration, and many hours of relying on both Google Personalized Page and Netvibes, I've managed to make my decision. And an easy decision it was too.

First off, let's look at Google's page. Simple interface, which is a plus for any system or application. But there is a fine line between simplicity and lack of functionality, and this is where Google fails. Here's the comparison:

• Netvibes has the ability to create as many pages (or tabs) as you wish). Google caps it at 6 tabs.


• Ability to add any RSS feeds to any page in Netvibes. Google only allows you to add 'stuff' (which may be feeds from other sites), and if your favourite site doesn't have a Google 'stuff' for the feeds, you're out of luck. (hey, they call it stuff, so don't look at me)


• A preview page when a feed item is clicked, which details the posted data, plus a list of all the posts in a particular feed. Clicking on a link item in Google directly brings you to the external site where the data is. After using it for a bit, I much prefer the preview page in Netvibes. I like being able to control when I go external, and when I don't I can still check out the content without leaving Netvibes.


• Netvibes looks so much slicker.


• Google does appear to be slightly faster.

Winner (by a mile): Netvibes.

Just a quick followup on the previous post. Talk about coincidence. I came across this article that talks about the market shares of online feed readers and interestingly, all three of the tools I mentioned yesterday, Bloglines, Google Personalized Page and Netvibes are in this article.

Consume and consider the following info: Google Operating System: The Market Shares of Online Feed Readers

When I use the internet, I just launch by browser and off I go to all the sites I need to go on a daily basis. Pretty much automatic. However, recently I laid eyes on Netvibes, and boy was a blown away. Sure it isn't new, but I've not been tempted before to click on a Netvibes RSS button that I keep seeing on a lot of blogs everywhere.

But yesterday I did, and I was stunned by the work and the artistry of the site. It was intuitive, quick, and bloody powerful. Before this I fire up Bloglines for a list of my feeds, but Netvibes is able to put everything on a page for me, and allows me full control over the sort of modules and items I want displayed on my page. And there are also tabs to keep me from being overwhelm, which is useful, since anything longer than 5 sentences overwhelm me easily.

I'm more than impressed also by the look and feel of the site. It doesn't look shabby, oh no.

So then I immediately turned to Google's Personalized Page. I've known about this page since it was launched (the joy of subscribing to the Google Blog), and to be honest, I wasn't very impressed. At that time, I wasn't so much into RSS, so I saw no value in it - I had no problems continuing to getting my news from Google News and my email in a separate pane.

Upon closer look this time around, with Netvibes as a yardstick, It does almost the same thing as Netvibes does, but looks wise it pales in comparison. But I've not been been known to only care about looks, so I resolve to dig a little deeper into Google's page, to see if there's anything I missed the first time.

One thing I'll be looking out for in particular would be performance - and this I can only determine after a few days worth of testing.

At present, although interface-wise the functionalities are similar (both drag and drop rearrangements and plenty of modules for each), it remains to be seen which one will eventually win my loyalty.

But hot damn Netvibes is pretty. :)

When we talk about the web, the general public will always think of the information contained within browser windows, and the hypertext links that brings me from Point A to Point B. Seldom do they ponder on the technology behind the pages, and I'd wager that if you ask anyone (non-technical, that is) about the development of the web since the beginning of 1990s, they wouldn't have noticed.

But changed it has. And the change has a name: Web 2.0.

Okay, okay, you can stop laughing now.

When it was first conceived, Web 2.0 was being blown off as hot air coming out of an elephant's tough behind. I suppose in retrospect that's probably because there wasn't a solid real-world example. In fact, think about that last sentence. *One* solid real-world example? Web 2.0 by its nature requires more than one website with fancy AJAX and client-side interactiveness to be even considered Web 2.0.

That's because the essense of Web 2.0 was it's ability to connect people, communities and our shared consciousness. Our combined knowledge leveraged with the speed afforded by the mediums we now have for communication and collaboration. Never before has the web allowed input from the average user, and use that very information as input for other users and uses.

I think it took years for these 'enabled' websites to spring up - all tying the other websites together, to bring them up as a coherent 'whole', before the term Web 2.0 was revitalized. Suddenly everyone is saying, 'Oh, so this is what they meant back in the day!'

Bear in mind that prior to the 'socialization' of the web, the web behaved very much like any controlled mass media, although admittedly it was easier to get web hosting space for your own homepage than it was to write op-eds in newspapers or appear in TV. But the direction of the information was one way, and that was from the screen to you.

It would be silly to try and pigeonhole the term Web 2.0 into one single definition, but if one attribute can be used to embody the spirit of Web 2.0, it would be the socialization of the web. Everyone being able to contribute to the site, giving others instant access to information regardless of physical location on the planet. Real-time communication, information gathering, parsing and tying everything together in a meaningful fashion, easy sharing of data and resources. Sharing. Community.

I came across this video that claims to explain Web 2.0 in under 5 minutes. It's does a good job as a summary, because, like I said, defining just one thing for Web 2.0 would be silly, but it is adequate. Check it out here.

For me, Web 2.0 is a state of being on the Internet, rather than an individual website.

Here is an article that discusses DRM on the iPod and iPhone, and how it locks you into Apple's solutions. Nothing new here, but more of an issue for people who can buy from iTunes, which doesn't include people like me.

This article is an interesting refresher on DRM music, and highlighting it against the ongoing backdrop of general cheer and jubilation on the unveiling of the iPhone.

There are people who advocate against DRM totally. I agree with that, but there are also valid points for using DRM solutions. I mean, I don't agree with DRM, but I can see why there'd be support for it. Blasphemy? Think about it. Suppose for a second that you're a content creator. You are a singer, for instance. Or an author. You work long and hard at your craft, and distribute it to the masses. You want them to buy you stuff of course. However you realize that your neighbour and your good friends have already got a copy of your work, *without* paying for them. How would you feel?

It's just that I'm writing a piece of software I intend to sell, and I won't be too comfortable if it's available just everywhere. Writing a book is something I would love to do one day, and sure enough, if I'm making money off it, I'm not so sure I'd be happy to have the ebook edition of my book floating around.

The trouble with all this noise about DRM is the majority of the people out there, especially the ones who make the most noise, is they are content consumers, not content providers, not content creators. To really know how DRM came to be, one has to step into these people's shoes.

Someone might invariably shove a Cory Doctorow to my face. Fair enough. But is everyone as far sighted as Cory? I know they need to be, but in reality, are they? Cory goes out of his way to advocate for freedoms in this regard, and props to him, no question about it.

If there was an affordable avenue for me to buy my music, I'd buy what I want. And I suspect there are plenty of people out there! I already buy my ebooks and audiobooks, when I know if I try hard enough I can get them for free.

What hasn't been said about the iPhone?

This is probably going to be the first in a series of posts in which I explore my thoughts since the announcement of this device. I'm not just going to talk about the device itself, but also about mobile devices in general, plus my own digital device needs. I find myself asking if I can indeed fit in the iPhone in my very exacting gadget requirements, which strictly speaking, the iPhone doesn't meet. I'm also thinking about the nature of a great packaging and can a strong user interface influence buying my decision?

I've always told everyone who'd listen not to buy an iPod. Here in Malaysia, where one of the major features for iPod usage, the iTunes store, is not available to us, it takes a way a huge determining factor for purchasing the iPod. What else is there to the iPod without the ability to purchase songs and TV shows on an affordable basis? There are other products out there offering similar (if not better) features than the iPod, similar form factors, and most importantly, at a price that won't have us all choke on our coffee.

I will get to all these soon.

I've been listening to podcasts since earlier this year, after a lull period of not being able to listen to my audiobooks. Being passionately involved in all things IT (although, I have to stress, that I'm Not A Nerd^TM), I have taken to listening to TWiT, which is pretty damn high on popular podcasts lists all over the internet. I'm not an incredibly huge fan of Leo Laporte, but have since developed an appreciation on how good a radio personality he is. TWiT isn't incredibly technical, but has a pretty good coverage of the latest and most popular tech news stories. Plus him knowing a good crowd of influential and important people in the tech business does a lot to make me pay attention.

However, I have, over the months and countless TWiTs, developed a slight overdose of Leo and friends, especially when there are countless spinoffs and even the friends of Leo having their own podcasts, which I must say, talks about basically the same things.

For instance, Leo has his whole TWiT network. His Security Now and This Week in Law are the only other TWiT spinoffs I'm mildly interested in, others are simply a sensory (in this case, auditory) overload. His guests in TWiT itself, such as John Dvorak, Patrick Norton, Robert Heron, and others have their own podcasts or IPTV shows. And what do they talk about? More of the same.

I've since sampled a couple of other tech podcasts (not much, admittedly, there's only so much time in a day when I commute), but I did discover a fabulous podcast, which is very different than TWiT, called IT Conversations. Hosted by Doug Kaye, this show is diverse, sometimes covering interviews with prominent individuals in the IT world, or recordings of talks in seminars or expos that are incredibly interesting. It was TWiT itself that introduced me to Kaye, and for that I'm incredibly grateful

I have recently finished two IT Conversations of note. One was an interview with Joel Spolsky, whose blog, Joel on Software, is one of *the* blogs for programmers, ISVs and a generally good read. This interview was fascinating to say the least, and it was wonderful listening to one of the more successful ISV operators and hear his thoughts on a variety of topics.

Another, I just finished today called What Teens Want from a Web 2.0 conference (something or other). In fact, it was this very podcast that inspired today's post. It's a recording of a talk in this conference where 5 teens were interviewed on what they do daily on the online world today, and what they wanted to see from companies on the forefront of Web 2.0 applications development.

The teens were generally talking about how they never buy music anymore, and how ipods, google, myspace and instant messaging are an integral part of their lives. Wonderful, wonderful stuff. It was funny and enlightening (I'm getting conscious of my superlatives now - I really wanted to say *incredibly* enlightening). The gem was probably the part where the host asked one of the teens on stage how he would spend 100 bucks online.

Host: Say you wanted to buy something online. Like a CD player.
Teen (puzzlement): A CD player?

I laughed for a long time driving home. :)

I won't stop listening to TWiT, but it's good to have an alternative listen. IT Conversations = highly recommended.