Expert Texture
The blogged wandering of Robert W. Anderson
Archive for March, 2006
March 31, 2006 at 2:46 pm · Filed under .NET
I have blogged about the JetBrains ReSharper product before (here, when I saw them at PDC05). I really love this product. I’m happy to say that their current pre-release (or early access program) of Resharper 2.0 works quite well with Visual Studio 2005. Visual Studio doesn’t come close to the refactoring capabilities of ReSharper. In addition, it has a much better symbol-searching facility and NUnit-compatible unit testing. Check it out.
I have only recently started using ReSharper to run unit-tests (in addition to TestDriven.net). It is to the point where I’m close to replacing TestDriven.net altogther. Don’t get me wrong: TestDriven.net is an excellent product (at a very good price), but I prefer the UI integration of TestDriven.net ReSharper.
And for me, the clincher: the JetBrains dotTrace profiling tool is easily launched directly from the Visual Studio UI. Just select the test and click on the dotTrace icon. For this to work, you also need the EAP version of dotTrace.
You can find the JetBrains Early Access Programs here.
March 30, 2006 at 11:32 am · Filed under Miscellaneous
I just got a Squeezebox yesterday. I am so swamped that I thought I’d wait to set it up till I had the luxury to really play with it. Then I installed it any way.
No kidding, in 3 minutes it was all working flawlessly.
This product was made for me. Over time I think they’ll end up sprinkled throughout my house.
I’ll post a review of it sometime soon.
March 26, 2006 at 2:25 pm · Filed under .NET
So, Vista is delayed. One must assume that Microsoft has made the best choice with the information at its disposal — certainly better info than the second-guessers who have pounced on Robert Scoble.
I am left with a couple of questions, though:
- What does this mean about Vista Server? That was already delayed beyond Vista Client. Can we hope for that in 2007? 2008?
- What about WinFx? I can understand why Workflow Foundation may need to track the Office 2007 release, but do Communications Foundation (WCF) and Presentation Foundation (WPF) have to wait for Vista? Do these parts really need 6+ months more work? And what about Atlas?
- And, of course, what about IE7? Is IE7 really that far from ready?
On my 2nd and 3rd questions, it is hard to imagine that Microsoft will release final parts early — it would take some of the wind out of the Vista sails — but as a software developer, I hope they do.
It is very difficult for ISVs to incorporate these new technologies into products while the dates keep slipping.
My point here isn’t to jump on the dogpile, but to make a plea to Microsoft:
Please, while retaining focus on quality, release WinFx and IE7 as soon as possible. Please do not wait for Vista’s release to make these components ready in final form.
Can anyone from Microsoft comment?
Tags: Microsoft, Vista, WCF, WF, WinFx, WPF
March 25, 2006 at 10:18 am · Filed under Miscellaneous, Web 2.0
Kevin Burton suggests that the Vista IE7 delay can be eliminated by tossing IE7 and adopting Firefox. I would be surprised if IE7 is on the Vista critical path, but the idea of Microsoft replacing IE7 made me laugh.
At first, I thought he was kidding, but he is serious (see the discussion between Robert Scoble and Kevin in the comments for that post). Fundamentally, Kevin’s idea is an interesting one, but that ship sailed a long time ago. Too many developers have products that rely on IE (e.g., NewsGator uses the IE browser control) with large installed user bases. Microsoft cannot just leave those developers and users in the lurch without a migration path.
Kevin suggests that since Firefox is a whole new application, that existing applications wouldn’t break. Good point, but remember, IE6 is considered a security problem. Abandoning IE7 doesn’t solve the IE6 problem for Microsoft.
They own the problem by winning the first Browser Wars and then letting IE stagnate.
Tags: Browser-Wars, Firefox, IE, IE6, IE7, Vista
March 25, 2006 at 9:36 am · Filed under Grid Computing, Web 2.0
Dan had quite a week (see his post, What a week!) at Digipede. We have a couple of new customers this week and a new release of the Digipede Network 1.2.
Unfortunatley, I wasn’t much help: I have been out most of the week with something my kids brought home from pre-school.
A lot of other things happened this week, too:
- Vista was delayed. Not surprising, but certainly disappointing. I guess this gives the ISV partners even more breathing room on the various Touchdown / BetaOne commitments.
- Mix06 happened. I wish I had been there — I’m sure Robert Scoble would have invited me to that Bill Gates Lunch
- SunGrid launched. And then was overwhelmed by a DoS (or just flooded by interest?).
- Tara Hunt unveils her Pinko Marketing Manifesto. It looks like she has some really good ideas here; however, I think her choice of imagery is going to be a stumbling block for too many.
Lot more too, but these are some that struck me.
Tags: Digipede, Mix06, SunGrid, Vista
March 21, 2006 at 9:24 am · Filed under Miscellaneous
J Wynia posted about how Good Enough Often Is. He talks about an experience with a company a few years back where the president’s motto was good enough never is. I like his post.
I started my career at a consulting company (Quantum Consulting, Inc.). Then president, Bruce Smith, used to say that our customers weren’t paying us for perfection. This resonated with me for its pragmatism. As J Wynia puts it:
Fundamentally, good enough usually *is* good enough. After all, “good enough” means it met a set of requirements. It accomplished the goal. And, when reaching good enough costs $10 and “perfection” another $100 or $1000, it becomes pretty hard to make a *rational* argument for why we should pursue that particular perfection.
Of course, if you are launching people into space then spend the 10 or 100 times as much time and money to approach perfection. Otherwise, just strive for good enough. Good enough is often quite challenging on its own (and of course, doesn’t preclude greatness).
I say: strive for greatness, achieve good enough, and forget perfection.
Tags: consulting, perfection, software
March 20, 2006 at 10:57 am · Filed under .NET, Miscellaneous
I agree with Don Dodge in his post The Next Big Thing doesn’t exist…says IBM. Innovation and disruption will continue to fuel big things. I will go further and say that some of these things will even be big by IBM’s standards.
Don Dodge’s post is made even better by mentioning us! Alex Barnett notices and says he needs to find out more about Digipede. Alex, what do you need to know?
Tags: Digipede, Microsoft
March 16, 2006 at 9:50 am · Filed under Web 2.0
I’ll be at the SDForum Search SIG tonight: The Search for Attention. Jeff Clavier (the SIG chair) has a post about it here.
Steve Gillmor is hosting the panel discussion with Dick Costolo, Gabe Rivera, David Sifry, and Seth Goldstein.
Steve will be talking about GestureBank — I’ve been teaming with him on its architecture — his presentation will precipitate much interest and discussion.
If you are there, look me up.
Tags: Attention, Gillmor, SDForum, searchsig, Web2.0
March 8, 2006 at 7:17 pm · Filed under Web 2.0
Similar to his post on SSE, Ray Ozzie’s post on Wiring the Web has generated a lot of chatter.
I see this as really two things:
- Solving a major usability problem in Web applications: unbearably limited copy and paste. While we take this for granted in our client applications, we have all gotten by without it in Web applications for way too long. In and of itself this is a big deal.
- Then, what I think is the actual big deal: a Web demonstration of something else that most of us have probably ignored outright: the L in OLE (i.e., linking). Sure, this works in our client applications (though I think many of us abandoned its use a long time back), but working between applications anywhere on the Internet? Very powerful. And yes, RSS will already allow us to subscribe and fetch data into our aggregator. But coupling microformats with RSS and a simple link-pasting mechanism gives us (and even the “average” user) so much more.
I wonder how many people are surprised that it ends up being Microsoft that comes up with something like this. This is real Web 2.0 innovation, yes, but also interesting is that it can remove a key usability advantage that smart-clients have over browser UI. Ironically this helps close the gap between the BUI and the GUI (and we know which one wins this fight when the gap is gone). Now, I really wish I was going to Mix06 — maybe there will be more up their sleeves. BTW, I like the fact that Microsoft is working with Dave Winer on these ideas (OK, maybe it is just Ray Ozzie doing that, I don’t know).
Marc Cantor says he loves the Web Clipboard here. I almost misquoted him as saying it was “coolio” — seemed like a safe bet — anyway, it layers well on his work with microformats.
Adam Green asks if Windows is relevant in a Web 2.0 world? He wonders if part of Mr. Ozzie’s motive is to make Windows still relevant. Certainly a valid question; however, the interop that the screencasts show between the OS and the Web may depend on Windows in this implementation (and specifically the Windows RSS Platform), but the underlying architecture does not. It is just XML. So is the question really: is the desktop OS relevant in a Web 2.0 world? Undeniably, yes. I, for one, would like to see the OS vendors fight for their customers on features and not using lock-in. This sounds like a feature, not a lock-in.
Jim Benson uses Mr. Ozzie’s effort of an example of how . . .
We are moving beyond push-blogging to actually sharing information. It’s beyond pull as well. The read write web may well be the push pull web … and all points in between.
I was having this same thought driving home today — though we all have to help make this happen by engaging in microformats and Web Clipboard adoption (otherwise we may end up with a push-me pull-you Web
I’m up for it.
Tags: Live-Clipboard, Microsoft, Ozzie, rss, SSE, Web2.0
March 6, 2006 at 10:22 am · Filed under Web 2.0
There has been much snarkiness in the blogosphere of late. Much has been written about the snarkiness. Much has been written about what has been written about the snarkiness.
What I think is missing from this discussion is an underlying framework to measure snarkiness. Doc Searls had the idea of a snarkiness slider; however, how will Technorati and others determine the level of snark?
To this end, I want to introduce the HyperText Snarkup Language (HTSL) which will initially be described as simply an extension of XHTML with a namespace. This will allow publishers to have full control over their snark.
First, an example:
<html . . . xmlns:snarkup='http://xmlns.hypersnark.org/snarkup/1.0/'>
<snarkup:snark target="http://example.org"
level="high"
tone="unhinged"
subtext="threatened" >
This guy is an idiot! He doesn't know ASP.NET from a hole in the ground.
I'm a real developer! A technologist! An inventor!
</snarkup:snark>
</html>
The snark tag
Allows the user to enclose snark text in tags to better identify the target of the snarkiness as well as the level, tone, and subtext.
<snarkup:snark target='href' level="low|medium|high" tone="even|sarcastic|abrasive|ironic|unhinged" subtext="none|veiledsuckup|allingoodfun|threatened" >
target allows the author to target a specific individual without a direct link. href is really a place holder for identity — I’ll wait to see how Identity 2.0 gets fleshed out.
level defaults to medium. tone defaults to even. subtext defaults to none.
The jumpthesnark tag
<snarkup:jumpthesnark href='href'/>
Allows the author to identify someone else’s post as going a step to far. Using this tag with no href (i.e., <snarkup:jumpthesnark/>) allows a publisher to self-identify this state.
Conclusion and a call for comment
It is my hope that HTSL will enable a host of new services. Like Snarkorati and Snarkorandum, and of course establishing the all important SnarkRank.
Feedback is welcome; I’m sure that the snark tags could use some enhancement.
<snarkup:snark target="www.scripting.com" level="low" tone="ironic" subtext="veiledsuckup">
If we can get adoption on this then we’ll be able to confirm Dave Winer’s claim that Nick Carr has the highest snark-to-information ratio.
</snarkup:snark>
Snark on!
March 5, 2006 at 8:25 pm · Filed under Web 2.0
I had a good talk today with Ed Batista of the AttentionTrust today. The primary motivation was to get an update on my progress with the IE port of the AttentionTrust Recorder (or ATX). This led into a discussion about the perceptions of the Trust. I mentioned one perception in my TechCrunch 5 post. On the eve of eTech (which I won’t be attending), I thought it worth while to reiterate something about the Trust. Note, I’m no spokesmodel — look to Steve Gillmor and Ed for that.
The AttentionTrust is not spyware. This claim is either made from ignorance (willful or otherwise) or to sow FUD. The statement doesn’t even make sense because the AttentionTrust is not software. It isn’t a service. It isn’t the Attention Recorder. It is the 4 principles and the mission (they are right here for those who don’t like to click on links):
Principles
When you pay attention to something (and when you ignore something), data is created. This “attention data” is a valuable resource that reflects your interests, your activities and your values, and it serves as a proxy for your attention.
AttentionTrust and our members believe that you have the following rights:
- Property You own your attention and can store it wherever you wish. You have CONTROL.
- Mobility You can securely move your attention wherever you want whenever you want to. You have the ability to TRANSFER your attention.
- Economy You can pay attention to whomever you wish and receive value in return. Your attention has WORTH.
- Transparency You can see exactly how your attention is being used. You can DECIDE who you trust.
When you give your attention to any entity that’s an AttentionTrust member, these rights are guaranteed.
Mission
- Empower people to exert greater control over their “attention data,” i.e. any records reflecting what they have paid attention to and what they have ignored. We accomplish this by promoting the principles of user control, by distributing our Attention Recorder, and by supporting the development of other appropriate tools, standards and practices.
- Educate people about the value of their attention and the importance of attention data.
- Build a community of individuals and organizations that will guarantee users’ rights to own, move, and exchange their attention data, in a transparent environment that gives users the freedom to decide how their data will be used.
That’s it. The ATX (attention recorder) allows you to store locally and / or provide data to services (one right now, ROOT). Using it isn’t in any way a requirement of the AttentionTrust’s principles nor mission. The ATX also isn’t spyware. Spyware spies without your consent. The ATX records with your consent and gives you control over your own attention data.
Full stop.
March 5, 2006 at 6:47 pm · Filed under .NET
A question I ask Microsoft people frequently is: what are you doing to promote your tools in the Web 2.0 world / to help SaaS startups use your technologies?
I saw two posts today that, while not answering this question, seem to me like progress:
ASP.NET 2.0 Training Center
Microsoft (and CMP and O’Reilly and Dr. Dobb’s) have rolled out the ASP.NET 2.0 Training Center. This is to help PHP / JSP / ColdFusion developers learn about .NET. This looks like a great resource for developers to learn about the capabilities of .NET. If you are a developer using one of these other technologies, check it out. There is a free copy of Visual Studio 2005 Standard in it for you if you view 3 webinars.
Obviously, this is a great tactic to get non-.NET users to see what ASP.NET has to offer — I’m sure they’ll get plenty of free-riders too
I found out about this from an O’Reilly post (see ASP.Net on a Roll). According to them, ASP.NET 2.0 is gaining leverage (as measured by book sales). Good news for Microsoft and for developers. ASP.NET is really a great way to build Web sites and services. I personally much prefer this to PHP, for example. Scripting languages are fine, but I’m in the strong-typing camp. And now since ASP.NET 2.0 can recompile your code on the server, it takes away a major scripting advantage.
Microsoft Startup Zone
In Microsoft Startup Zone Launches, Don Dodge announces the new Microsoft Startup Zone, sort of a portal into Microsoft’s Emerging Business Team. This site is full of resources for startup companies. While I still would like to see a partner program for SaaS startups, this site is worth a visit if you want to see what Microsoft has to offer emerging companies.
Tags: .NET, asp.net, Microsoft, SaaS, Startup
March 3, 2006 at 2:44 pm · Filed under .NET, Grid Computing
Yesterday Dan and I discussed a pet peeve of mine: compute cycles being likened to electricity. This comes up nearly every time someone talks or blogs about utility computing. The catalyst this time was Nicholas Carr and his piece, Is the Server Industry Doomed? While he doesn’t even mention electricity here, it doesn’t take much to get us back on this topic. BTW, I agree that much of IT is heading toward utility computing; . . . but, the electricity metaphor doesn’t hold up because the cycles are not electricity.
I told Dan I might blog on this topic, but he beat me to it in this post: Because 1.21 gigaflops just aren’t 1.21 gigawatts (and then has apparently continued arguing with Mr. Carr since then). Even better than me having to write a thing! As Dan says:
Partly, it’s just physics. All electrons look alike (let’s not get into electron spin here: as far as my appliances are concerned, every electron looks the same). It doesn’t matter to me if the power that’s lighting up my life, running my refrigerator, and powering my PC came from a wind farm, a hydroelectric plant, or a diesel turbine. Well, for environmental reasons, I might prefer the former two, but the point is that when an electron gets to me, I can’t tell where it came from.
Computes just aren’t the same. Computes look different on different operating systems. Not all software runs on all operating systems. Different people prefer different toolsets, and they always will. Some OSs are better for some things than others, and people choose the appropriate OSs for them. Yes, we’ve all read about “write once, run everywhere” software–but a small minority of software actually runs that way. OSs are different, and they will continue to be different. People will continue to write software that takes advantage of particular OSs.
But, that wasn’t really my point either.
Lets allow that utility computing is the centralized generator (analogous to electric utilities), but what is being generated? Certainly not compute cycles. The generator burns compute cycles (and electricity and data) to produce . . . data.
So, is the commodity the data? Of course not. Data are almost always proprietary. Is moving the data the commodity? Bandwidth is a commodity, but it only scarcely resembles electricity transmission and distribution.
So, the commodity in utility computing is the compute cycle, but utility computing doesn’t resemble an electric utility. The metaphor just doesn’t make sense. I guess people like it because there was a time when electricity generation moved from a local to a centralized model.
How about a moratorium on the electric utility metaphor? Utility computing doesn’t need a metaphor to make sense.
Tags: Digipede, grid, Utility-Computing
Main feed
Email subscriptions
