Blogs

RedMonk

Skip to content

links for 2007-07-21

Categories: Links.

links for 2007-07-20

Categories: Links.

Europa Screencasts, The Making Of

The last in the series of five Eclipse Europa screencasts was published this week while I was off in Marfa, TX on vacation. The five are:

This post isn’t so much about the Europa screencasts themselves as it is about how I made them, which has been a frequent question. I go into the minutia of video and screencast editing, so it may seem terribly nerdy and boring if you’re not interested in that topic.

In general, the notes below apply to straight-up video as well as screencasts.

The Format

First, the format of the videos was a sort of “conversation demo” between me and the respective project representatives (usually leads on the project). The Eclipse person gives a brief overview of the project, mostly what it does, and then proceed to walk through a handful of demos showing off general and new functionality in the project. Throughout the demo I’d ask questions, summarize things, and other wise comment on things I thought were interesting or wanted to explore more.

While I’d been shooting for 10-15 minutes for each screencast, they ended up being 20-25. To get that, we’d usually spend anywhere form 60 to 90 minutes recording, meaning I typically edited out quite a lot.

In two instances, for Mylyn and BIRT, I got the chance to shoot actual video that I put at the beginning of each demo as the intro/overview segment.

The Tools

Screencasting with one person with one take is quite straight-forward now-a-days thanks to Camtasia (Windows), iShowU (OS X), SnapZProX (OS X), and any number of other tools (I’m not sure what’s available for Linux). I haven’t used Camtasia (as I’m not going to pay $300 for Windows software, being primarily on a Mac), but I understand it has some good editing features in it. Last I checked, screencasting grand theorist Jon Udell uses Camtasia, so it must be acceptable (though he says dumb when it comes to screencasts).

Screencasting with multiple people is another story involving capturing the video and audio somehow.

Desktop Sharing

The first challenge, of course, is seeing the remote desktop of the Eclipse narrator. ,There’s no end of desktop sharing services now-a-days: WebEx, GoToMeeting, Microsoft LiveMeeting, and Acrobat Connect. Being on OS X, the first 3 are always touch and go. The 4th has always worked, not to mention that RedMonk has a year long trial for Connect.

Connect turned out to be a fine tool for desktop sharing. You have to install a small Connect client application before using it, but none of the participants had a problem doing it. On my end, in OS X land, it worked out perfectly.

So, with Connect, the Eclipse presentor and I would login to RedMonk’s connect account, they’d share their desktop or application, I’d see their desktop on my side, and then I’d record it with my screen capturing tool (more on that below).

Recording Client Side

In the case of BIRT, due to scheduling problems, Virgil used Camtaisa on his end to record the screencast portion on his own. In truth, the quality of this video was the best. It’d be great if Camtaisa had some sort of offering where I could send remote people their recording agent to record on the client side. The problem there would be trusting that they set it up correctly, but that wouldn’t have been an issue with the highly technical people I was talking with.

Video Capture

Once the we were hooked up on Acrobat Connect and I could see the Eclipse presentors remote screen, the next thing I needed to do was record that remote screen. Ideally, you can select an area of the screen to capture instead of only being able to capture the entire screen. This was especially needed for how I did the Europa screencasts by capturing a remote desktop.

For video, I use iShowU for three reasons: it’s cheap, has all sorts of options I can play with but still has several pre-sets to get you started, and has an interface that seems more “natural” than SnapZProX.

SnapZProX follows what I always think of as the “where the hell is my application Window?” model of OS X windowing. I’m sure there’s some official name for it, but the general thing is that the application in question is not quite sure if it’s an application or sort of pop-up Window thing. That’s sort of a petty thing to choose on, but what the hell? iShowU is more simply an application. Though it hides itself if you tell it too when you’re recording, it doesn’t act like one of those ghost applications that I can’t describe. It’s just an app, that’s it.

iShowU also has all sorts of settings for video, which is fun for a nerd like me. But, it comes with several pre-sets out of the box which is helpful for figuring out the proper settings.

Also, iShowU is cheap at $20 vs. SnapZProX’s $69. As far as I can tell, both do pretty much the same thing, so I’ll go with the cheaper one ;>

There is (hopefully was) one problem with iShowU: it’d crash sometimes after recording about 50-60 minutes of video, loosing all of the captures video. The author of iShowU was quick to respond that to my support emails, though he didn’t have a fix. It seemed like there was some QuickTime bug. I’ve gotten several updates to both iShowU and QuickTime since then, so perhaps it’s fixed. As a work around, I’d just save the video every 15-20 minutes, which was sort of weird (and annoying for audio synching) but it wasn’t too shabby.

Audio

Along with the visual for the demo, you of course need the audio. I talked with each presenter over Skype, allowing me to use my long time podcasting tool-buddy, Audio Hijack Pro. For all the media stuff I do, Audio Hijack Pro is by far one of my favorite tools: it just works, and more importantly, I trust it.

Trusting

As a brief rabbit-hole, let me explain that trust part. Recording computer audio and video still has that feel of being a magical hack to it. As such, in the back of my head, I’m always wondering if it’s going to fail or simply sound terrible. Part of this is that I’m not training in audio or video, so I have no idea what I’m supposed to do with all those virtual knobs, levels, and jiggling read-outs. Audio Hijack Pro certainly has all that stuff, but it hasn’t really let me fail due to my ignorance.

Now, iShowU has some way to record all the audio on your machine…I think…but involved using SoundFlower which, to be honest, I can never get to work correctly. That is, I don’t trust SoundFlower, it requires me to be too smart. So, while it might have worked out to use iShowU to record the audio, I ended up using Audio Hijack Pro.

This means the result of recording video and edit are two types of files: the video and audio files, which I have to synch up in editing.

Audio Editing

Sound editing

Finally, I’d use Audacity to do micro editing on the audio and The Levelator to level out the sound. In later screencasts, I enabled the feature of Audio Hijack Pro wherein it records my audio and the remote audio into separate tracks (the right and left channels in the audio). This was fantastic as I could loud up the final audio into Audacity and silence out any background noise on my end while the presenter was talking or unsuccessful interruptions either of us made. I even removed some excessive “right”‘s and “uh-huh”‘s on my end.

While Final Cut Express HD comes with some audio editing software, which looks quite impressive in the demos, I’ve used Audacity for so long with my audio-only podcasts that I feel most comfortable with it.

Once I edited the audio, I’d re-import it to Final Cut Express HD, silent out the original tracks, thus putting in my editing audio as the final sound track.

Editing

Editing EMF Screencast

Once I got the video and audio — as I said, about 60-90 minutes — I loaded them up in Final Cut Express HD for editing. Now, Final Cut Express HD is one of those pieces of software that I get angry at. Getting angry at software is stupid, but it happens. Really, I should be angry at the team who selected the features, or rather, excluded the ones I want.

To be fair, those last two letters in the software should clue you in that they’re not going to be good for screencast editing: “HD” is for TV, not for computer demos. Indeed, that’s the first silly thing in “FCE”: it only edits in and exports to TV formats. That is, you can’t just tell it “I want to edit a 1024×768 video at 15fps.” Oh no, it’d gotta be one of the TV or HD formats and that’s it!

This constraint causes all sorts of problems: first, the videos you import have to be at the proper frame rate, which means I usually have to spend time converting up to 29.97fps from the 15 I record screencasts in. This is no big deal, it’s just time burnt setting up the conversations.

Second, when editing, I have to place the video an HD sized screen which means most of the editing space is wasted (black) as HD resolutions are much larger than the ideal 1024×768 screencasting size. Again, no big deal, but it just makes FCE look stupid in that it’s crippled. And, of course, the audio is the same way: FCE is picky about the format of the audio it deals with. Doesn’t want to get it’s dainty hands dirty, I guess.

Third, when I finally export the screencasts, I suffer frame the same “wasted space” in the output. This is actually very annoying. Thankfully, I figured out using another tool — VisualHub — to crop videos down. After a bunch of napkin math, and relying on the video being centered, you can tell VisualHub to crop in x number of pixels on either side. Hence, while you might export a video that’s in HD (1280×720, 1920×1024, etc.), you can just slice out all that black space, resulting in a 1024×768 video in the end.

Once the video and audio are imported into FCE, the editing is pretty straight-forward. I had to synch up the audio and video, but that became easy once I started saying giving myself a marker in the audio: I’d start recording audio first, and then as I said “now we’re recording,” I’d click the record button in iShowU.

I’m not sure how you’re supposed to do video editing in FCE, but here’s how I do it for both screencasts and normal video:

  1. I watch the “raw” video in a “sequence” (just a linear ordered collection of video and audio) marking what seem like logical sections as “sub-sequences.” These sub-sequences could be things like “introduction,” or “demonstrating round-triping in EMF,” or even “thanks!” They can last from 10 seconds to 5 minutes. This is the bulk of editing time as I have to watch all of the video and often go back and forth to figure out the right place to cut things up.
  2. After slicing up the raw video into sub-sequences, I pick the sub-sequences to include in the “highlights” version. At the very least, I typically end up cutting about half, if not much more, of the “raw” content. So, if you wanted to be all clever, you could say that I’m choosing what I don’t want as much, if not more, than what I want.
  3. Once I’ve got the all the sub-sequences I want, I make up a short (3-5 second) title clip.
  4. Then I slap on the RedMonk logo at the beginning, followed by the title clip, the main body of the video, and then cap it off with the “stock” RedMonk ending clip that lists our URL and Creative Commons text.

The begins the process of encoding…

More FCE Ranting

FCE actually works well for editing “normal” video. It’s just ill-suited for “computer video,” that is screencasts. Of course, I could spend hours ranting about all the little things in FCE that piss me off. For example, for some asinine reason, it stops playing video when you switch away from it: it’s greedy for you attention!

That “on the other hand” aside, I have to say that the real insult of Final Cut Express HD is that it’s $300. If it allowed you to edit any type of video and wasn’t just crippled to TV/HD formats, that might be bearable. But, at $300, I expect software to do pretty much everything possible for it’s type of software. And, really, does the feature of being able to specify any video size really “cost” Apple the hundreds of dollars it takes to upgrade to Final Cut Pro, or, as I like to call it, “Final Cut Does What I Expect a $300 Piece of Software to Do…Pro”?

I don’t mind paying for software, but my tolerance for feature cutting shenanigans stops at about $20. $300 for feature-flipped crippled software is just arrogant as crap. But, hey, it’s Apple! Shut-up and go buy an iPhone!

Encoding with VisualHub

As mentioned above, the last item in the screencast tool-chain is VisualHub. VisualHub is that video converting/encoding software that you wish QuickTime was once you plunk down that $30 or so for QT. VisualHub will convert between most any format and allow you to do all sorts of little settings (like cropping and re-sizing). So, I can take the “raw” export from FCE and convert to an iPod/iPhone friendly video, a scaled down video, a Flash video, whatever bit rates for video and audio I want, or any of the other formats and user-specified sizes VisualHub provoides.

It’s really a great piece of software up there with Audio Hijack Pro. This is primarily, I think, because VisualHub is focused first on several use cases rather than being just a bucket of settings you can twiddle with.

And, it’s also quite fast.

Unlike FCE and QuickTime itself, you can actually save the settings so you don’t have to re-configure your video encoding each time. This last point is something I was yet another thing I naively expect in FCE. I mean, you can set-up all sorts of configuration profiles for printers in OS X, but not for the ever more complex and widget-setting rich process of video encoding?

And at $23.32 (palindrome pricing?), it’s very sanely prices. No FCE jerk-pricing here!

Publishing

Eclipse EMF Demo

As with all RedMonkTV videos, I post the screencast our podtech blog and the RedMonk TV blog. Of course, I also posted a pointed on my own blog.

The only hitch here was that, initially, I didn’t make it clear enough that there was a larger version of the video available than the 320×240 or 420×270 video. Those are, of course, too small for those who want to follow along in detail. There was a larger version available as video download, but it wasn’t immediately obvious that they were large versions. But, after the first post or two, I simply linked directly to the large version and a larger Flash version that we provided on RedMonkTV.

Thoughts on the Tool-chain

While the end result was collection of good and useful screencasts, the tool-chain I used left a lot to be desired. The main problem came with the video editing tools available. From my experience over the past few months working on RedMonkTV, it seems like video editing is still a well fortified software silo. This means that (a.) it’s expensive, and, (b.) it has it’s own conventions and “UI language” if you will.

Editing

For people without video editing backgrounds (like me) iMovie has a brilliant interface and is incredibly usable, but Apple has crippled it such that it’s not really usable for my needs: you can only edit one video track for example, and forget putting videos side-by-side together like I do for DrunkAndRetired.com.

I so, so wish that Apple would make a sort of “iMovie Pro” that had the same interface and usability that iMovie does with some of the abilities that Final Cut Express HD has. FCE has fantastic abilities, but it’s interface is really, really weird. What’s shocking is how un-Apple it is: it’s a classic example of the Winamp UI anti-pattern. Again, I hope this is what the core user-base of “traditional” video editors wants, but for “new video editors” like myself, it’s annoying.

Video editing tool-chains are very much chains of tools rather than one or two pieces of software you use to get the final product. I had to use 8 different tools (not including the FTP program, the blog publishing software, and iTunes to edit ID3 tags) to get the video. I’m sort of OK with this being a programmer, but it can ridiculous after awhile to add yet another application to the tool-chain.

Encoding Formats

The other issue with screencasts and video in general is the mass proliferation of video formats. When doing a podcast, there’s one format: MP3. That’s sort of it. (Yes, I know I should want to use OGG.) In video, you’ve got containers and encoding for your video, and then the proprietary pissing matches between Apple, Microsoft, and Adobe to deal with. For a producers and consumers of video, it’s all just a royal waste of time. I settled on the podtech formats (which are the ones I would have chosen anyways): Apple and Adobe, MP4 w/H.264 and Flash.

Encoding into those formats takes a long, long time itself. I use the term “encoding” to mean “getting the video into a format that I can publish.” Typically, you’re editing in high quality formats and the “raw” result of that is 10-20 gigs of video, if not more. Distributing that amount of video is, well, not something I want to do. So, I have to encode to compress. Also, I have to publish at 4 different formats for the screencast: the iPod-ready MP4/H.264 video, the larger MP4/H.264 video, the small Flash video, and the larger Flash video. VisualHub makes doing this extremely easy. The only hitch is that it takes anywhere from 30-90 minutes for each format. As you can imagine, each time I screw up that first 60 minutes of encoding (with a typo, usually), I get all upset and then have to re-encode ;>

Storage

Finally, video is the only media I’ve produced where I have to worry about storage all the time. At the moment I have about a terabyte of storage available across my external hard-drives and laptop. I’ve filled about 90% of that up with video, audio, music, and all my other crap. I’ve got another terabyte I haven’t hooked-up yet, but will need to right-quick. I can see why people like Seagate readily shoveled cash into video propagators like podtech. With all the video I produce for DrunkAndRetired.com and RedMonk, I’m always fiending for more storage, even after deleting as much as possible. Storage may be “cheap,” but I need a lot of it.

Overall

Overall, as troublesome as I may make it sound above, the end result is quite nice. Once you disect any production process, it can seems lengthy and tedious. But, after awhile, you just do that stuff without thinking and quickly. Once I figured out the tool-chain and starting using a process (“marking” the audio for synching, chopping into sub-sequences, etc.), it went by as fast as possible. The same was true for audio editing with podcasts, and I consider those a snap, now, compared to video.

Personally, it was a great way to learn about each project (more or less) first hand in the quickest way possible, by observing, questioning, and then re-observing (while editing) an expert teach me how to use the tool. Hopefully, the same will be true (minus the re-observing ;>) for viewers.

Postscript: Irony!

You may be thinking, clever reader you are, “why didn’t you just make a screencast of this?” Indeed! Perhaps one day when I have time I will. But, I’d wager that take 3-4 hours to make, where-as typing it up takes a fraction of that.

Disclaimer: Eclipse, Adobe, and Microsoft are clients. Eclipse paid for the Europa screencasts.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Categories: Podcasts, RedMonkTV, Screencasts, The Analyst Life, The New Thing.

links for 2007-07-14

Categories: Links.

Vacation: July 16th to July18th

I’ll be on vacation Monday to Wednesday next week. Keep your eye on Twitter and flickr for updates ;>

Technorati Tags: ,

Categories: The Analyst Life.

links for 2007-07-13

Categories: Links.

Update from RIA-land: AIR & Silverlight, What is an RIA?, Better GUIs, the Killer App

Microsoft and Adobe

While a more nuanced understanding of the two kind of balks at putting AIR and Silverlight in the same RIA bucket and, thus, competing with one another, I tend to still look at the two in that bucket when I ask what’s going on in vendor-lead RIA. It’s sort of like the difference between like “red wine” instead of, well, I like “red wine,” so I don’t know what the True Wine Believers would like…uh…vintages? (I’ll have some bourbon.) This:

This morning I dialed into a teleconference on Microsoft’s RIA hopeful, Silverlight. The technology overview wasn’t anything new, it was more one of those calls to tell you what the current state of things are. As an analyst, I find these helpful to figure out what the official line is from a company on a technology. You know, some good triangle management: get the update on their talking points and messaging.

The key take-away on the Silverlight front is that Adobe and Microsoft have essentially the same messaging at the moment when it comes to RIA. I sort of lean towards Adobe being the first mover on the story, but it’s a bit irrelevant. In the vendor sports thunderdome of RIA, who said what first isn’t really top on the list. You could say that Flex, a key foundation of AIR, is more mature and, thus, a better bet than Silverlight (and certainly than the yet to be released JavaFX), but, in all honesty, by the time people are decided which one to choose or not, I feel like the two could be technologically head-to-head. This is not a post comparing the two anyhow. We’re concerned about the stories being told.

The nut of the RIA story from both Microsoft and Adobe is this:

  • We need, even better, deserve richer UIs. If you catch us in a bad mood, or after a few drinks, we’ll also tell you that the web as UI platform sucks. Our appreciation for the web as “having it’s place,” however, is actually quite mature and not just prattle to calm down people like RedMonk.
  • Richer UIs will lead to better user experiences and connection to brand. Better user experiences lead to making more money with software, primarily through brand strength that allows you to markup your product. See the Teknision crew for more.
  • We need a better web application development tool-chain. The current web application tool chain is less than ideal. PhotoShop to web browser looses the fidelity of the original design and is not maintainable. RIAs have the tool-chain for success.
  • RIAs must be cross-browser. I mean, we put Opera icons in all our presentations!

Where the two diverge a bit are:

  • Adobe is more about the offline story and, more specifically, providing a desktop GUI. As such, the feel from them is more building whole applications rather than just parts of web applications or little widgets.
  • Microsoft mentions video whenever it can. Demos of Silverlight usually include astounding feats such as displaying clusters of HD video all at once. Silverlight, of course, is a sub-set of .Net with it’s own CLR, which makes it a bit more of a platform-y thing. The hobbling here, of course, is that it’s from Microsoft, and so developers tend to be cynical that it’d be a multi-platform platform, which is sort of, you know, the whole point of a platform, and don’t forget the tool-chain that’s one of the main points of all this RIA hoopla. That said, how ’bout that Moonlight? What would developers thing if there were two, Microsoft OK’ed [D|C]LRs running around?

Judging these claims and points is for another time. I think simply capturing them is interesting enough.

What is an RIA? And the Ajax Question

As with SOA, when more people come to the party, the question of what exactly an RIA comes up more. Does Ajax constitute an RIA? How about just a really well done web application? Is it more about the quality of experience or the technology that implements it? Is the iPhone an RIA?

My simple sieve consists of three parts:

  1. Is it something trying to act like a web application (only better!), including connecting to and interacting with the web?
  2. Is it trying to go beyond standard web application UI technology using something more than Ajax?
  3. Did you have to download a browser plugin or other runtime?

Answering “yes” to more than less of those, you probably have an RIA. Sure, that’s not a tried-and-true method, but it’s something more than the other method that works 100% of the time, “I’ll know it when I see it.”

This leads to the question of why using Ajax doesn’t constitute an RIA. Philosophically, that question has a point: Ajax is certainly trying to go beyond <form/>‘s and <input/>‘s (if I had a 40, I’d pour out a bit for my dead homie, the HTML form). On the other hand, I sort of feel like if we say Ajax is an RIA, we defuse meaning out of the idea of an RIA. There’s still a sort of hump Ajax hasn’t gotten over yet: it still feels like an HTML-bound web application, just one where you can drag-n-drop and don’t have to refresh the whole page. But, I dunno: it’s still a good question.

So, I am left with thinking of RIAs as either AIR/Flex/Flash, Silverlight, or other plug-in based environments that provide more GUI-oriented UI toolkits.

To throw another wrench in the discussion: is SecondLife an RIA? Why or why not?

A Better Development Method

To the tool-chain point, we all know that most UI development sucks. Developers are continually looking for a much better way to do UIs. That’s how Sun’s RIA contender, JavaFX, started after all. When it comes to the long-term, this is the point that I think is key: if all this RIA hoopla results in better UI frameworks (GUI and web), I’m all for the hoopla, throw some gas on the fire.

There are 3 problems to solve when developing good UI frameworks:

  • The resulting UI must look good and run fast.
  • The framework must be easy to code, quick to modify, and over-all simple. Object-oriented pure stacks need not apply. I got a window, and I wan to put text in it, screw the OO metaphysics.
  • For the long-term, the UI frameworks must include workflow and data-model tie-ins that are more than click-and-point fantasy.

The second item is one of the key points of AIR: you can use web technologies (HTML, CSS, JavaScript, Ajax no less!) to develop desktop GUIs. How’s that for the prodigal UI framework coming back home after spending time in the world wide wilds?

The last point is where most UI frameworks fail long term. They never seriously move into the controller and model of the MVC trinity. Struts+JSP is a great example here. Struts was great when it first came out and for years afterwards. But then you were like, “crap, I got all this spaghetti and it takes forever to update and change it.” Updating Struts based UIs in version 5 of your product is painful. You know, where your boss is like, “hey, we just need to add two more check boxes to page 5 in the wizard,” and you respond, “that’ll take a month.”

I don’t know of any RIA technology that’s offered much in the line of workflow and data-modeling for version 5 of your UI. There’s always the 37signals answer — figure it out later — I suppose, but it sure would be snazy to have more than that.

Nonetheless, the developer in me is looking for a better UI framework. Other dev types I talk with are looking for the same thing.

The Killer App!

More so than other technologies, RIAs need a real killer app to drive people to stop using “poor internet applications” (the web) and start using RIAs.

Pirated Video

Video is the obvious one in the driver’s seat, but I think free, probably illegal video, is the more precise way of putting it. Getting something valuable for free has always been a killer application, and it’ll apply with RIAs as much as anything else.

As a counter example, we have Joost, which is sort of cool, but isn’t nearly as cool as the much simpler, and must-be-illegal tv-links.co.uk. I mean, I like watching old episodes of GI Joe and Transformers as much as the next Gen X’er, but if I want Veronica Mars, I’ll settle for the crappy “reception” I can get elsewhere. As ever, the problem with legal, free content on the web is that the content providers assume we’ll take whatever crap they give us. Turns out we want the good stuff that’s “worth paying for,” but we don’t want to pay for it.

SaaS

Another possible killer app — one that Adobe seems to be aware off, kinda-maybe — is using RIA’s as the pretty face for SaaS applications. AIR is well positioned to deliver what Microsoft calls “connected applications” (meaning, desktop applications that are actively engaged with the web…but are not web browsers).

I’m waiting to see if Facebook gets an AIR wrapper like eBay has. Or MySpace or whoever. Twitter has countless offline clients that skirt the line between being an IM client and an RIA: I use and like Twitterrific which seems like an RIA but is a proper OS X desktop application.

On the business side, we summed it up well in a past MonkCast: maintain all that IT gorp on desktops is a hassle, and part of the appeal of web applications is that they’re easier to maintain. SaaS is the grander vision of this, and layering on RIAs that remain true to the “easy to install and update” nature of web applications (by virtue of almost zero foot-print on the desktop?) could be a Big Deal. It’s the SunRay vision, rolled through the Netscape days, on down web application row, sprinkled with Ajax, but then finally, potentially, back to having a fully operational GUI without the install mess.

Straight up Retailing

Currently on the web, we have AdSense and product placement/influence in blogs as the cream of the crop for moving product. That is, selling stuff. If it turns out that using RIAs increases sales, you can bet Amazon, eBay, and everyone else will do the dirty work of convincing end-users to use RIAs with discounts, better offers, and more virtual equivalents of putting the eggs and milk at the back of the grocery store.

eBay has it’s AIR application that we’ll have to watch for increased revenue. I’m told Amazon does all sorts of UI tweak testing on “test groups,” so I’m sure we’ll hear about their success or failure.

Selling more product is always a killer feature.

Web Colonization, or, Buttressing Roach Motel 2.0

Finally, though I don’t favor the trend, there’s quite a bit of web colonization going on. Increasingly, site providers want to “bucketize” eyeballs and keep them stuck on one URL and it’s sub-domains. The Sacred Link is a-OK as long it stays on the same site.

Obviously, you’ve got Facebook, MySpace, and all the social network sites that you have to go to to get any use from.

RIAs could serve an apt honey pot to both draw people into these roach motels and keep them stuck there. With an RIA, you could slowly strip away the idea of “the web” and keep the user’s focus on the roach motel. Sure, you might pull in data and processes from the web, but your goal would be to use the RIA as a sort of firewall against web 1.0.

Unfortunately, I think it could work quite well. We’ll see if Apple goes for that gambit as it, really, their favorite play.

<eom>

That’s the general dump on what seems to be going on in the RIA space. What’s your feel?

Disclaimer: Microsoft, Adobe, and Sun are client.

Technorati Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,

Categories: Development Tools, Ideas, Java, Social Software.

What IT Management Should Enable: Making Money

This morning I had dialed into a fun teleconference with one of Tivoli’s customers. This customer told us how it’d used Maximo to establish an ITIL-y service desk. The company had gotten the ITIL fever and was on a “journey” (that’s a key-word to pay attention to in enterprise software as the unspoken adjective cluster is usually “painful and expensive, but necessary) to convert it’s IT process to ITIL. Pink Elephant would have been happy to see their name up there. With Maximo they’d established a service desk along with dashboard-cum-portal for different IT roles to login, check if there were any pending “SR’s” (Service Requests) for them to handle or, if they were the appropriate role, get over-all data about how IT was going.

I didn’t get details on how much this implementation cost, how many people it would require (though the customers said they were targeted less head-count), but, as you’d suspect from a customer call like this, they seemed happy enough. The customer was a large out-fit that did some heavy-duty US government outsourcing, so I figured that spending wasn’t too much of an problem.

Another funny-cause-it’s-true anecdote was an answer to a question about integrating other processes into the ITIL-seasoned IT backbone: well, we were planning on integrating process XYZ, but that guy just retired, so we’re a bit slower on that than we’d like. Yuh!

Mo’ Data

At one point, one of the customers mentioned that after implementing the service desk, they had a much richer set of data to deal with when making IT decisions. While we didn’t dig too deep into that, you can imagine that:

  • tracking the types of requests that come in and metrics about how much it costs (in time and money) to fulfill those requests, and,
  • having a mental model (probably ITIL-based) for looking at all that data would give managers a more informed ability to make answer questions like “are we provisioning new employees as effectively as possible?” or “are those $10,000/month servers worth what we pay for them (yet)?”

While I like to abstract up the scope to company-wide levels (as I quickly get to below), the same principal applies at all levels in a company. Unless you’re just entertaining yourself or looking to pass the time, when you’re operating in a business context, you need data about your situation that informs what you do next when it comes to business process, whether that doing next is making a change or supporting the current “way things are done.”

IT as a “Lever”

Now, I can’t say for sure if Maximo and other Tivoli products in particular actually do that from this mornings call. But, I like that topic of IT management theory a great deal. I was talking about it in-depth most recently on another call where I was asked what the deal with BSM (or “Business Service Management”) was. The cliché answer is that it provides “business/IT alignment,” which is sort of like saying “it’s mom and apple-pie.”

More nitty-gritty, the answer is that the vision of BSM is to reduce IT to a component of the over-all way the business makes money instead of temperamental silo of patch desktops and clunky services. On the face of it, that means attaching cash amounts to various IT “services” and “assets” such that business managers can start to make decisions about how IT is used, maintained, fixed, or killed off.

For me IT management serves one primary scenario: when VP’s are yelling at each other. You know the drill, there’s a room (or teleconference) full of execs and vice presidents playing CYA hot-potatoe or trying to convince each other to follow some plan to profit success. In what most people call “immature” setups, the issue is often finding out what went wrong in IT and how to go about fixing it. In more “mature” shops, the issue is getting the IT department to do the things the business plan du jour requires.

When IT Gobbles up Profit

In either case, the company is trying to make money by caring out the business processes most effectively (be that high margins, volume sales, customer satisfaction, or whatever the plan is). In the stereotypical example, the IT department retards that effectiveness by either

  • breaking and preventing the company’s eventually collection of cash from customers, and/or,
  • costing too much or taking too long to fulfill the IT needs of the business plan.

For me, the idea of BSM and contemporary IT management in general is centered around fixing those stereotypical IT problems. In modern business, this largely means giving decision makers in the company the data and processes needed to figure out what’s going wrong and then deploy corrective plans. Otherwise, as a manager, you’re left with making leaps of faiths for solving problems or deploying new ways of making money.

Much of the dashboards, reports, and other enterprisey feeds and tick-lists are targeted towards providing those sets of data and processes. The scenerios here are nothing revolutionary: you could be loosing customers because your web-site is slow when it comes to checking out; your IT staff spends most of it’s time keeping desktop application up-to-date and increasing inbox storage quotas, so they can’t go implement that new service; store managers are getting their nightly inventory reports days late, so they can’t hit the re-stocking window quickly enough to get more product to sell.

Instead of just telling you that a server is down, the idea is to tell you that your customers can’t but toothpaste (and you might want to check cluster 40bravo.atlanta). People need that toothpaste!

Mo’ Money

At the first stage, the IT department has to answer the question “how can I stop loosing money for the company,” at the next stage, the question is, “how can I use less money,” and the final stage is “how can I make the company money?” When IT was more simple — probably because there was less of it more so than individual IT chunks being “simple” — you generally knew that if everything was up and running, the business was doing all right.

When your IT threw-up a bunch of events and the icons turned red, it was time to scramble. Now that we have an endless amount of IT, both new and black-box legacy, the question is more complex than simply keeping machines up. The baseline for IT management, then, is turning lights green and red. While the “upper level” features you’re looking for are attaching conclusions and relationships to those lights that let you determine how you should respond to to make more money.

Disclaimer: IBM is a client, as are the BSM-fans, BMC.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Categories: Enterprise Software, Systems Management.

Eclipse DTP Screencast

The latest, and 4th Eclipse Europa screencast is up and available, this time on the Data Tools Platform project, or DTP. As with all Eclipse projects, DTP provides quite a bit of platform plumbing, but in this screencast we see many of the more end-user facing tools that are available in the Europa bundle. Most interesting to my unit testing memories of woes is the DbUnit integration. And, as I comment in the screencast, the SQL query tools look like they’d have been a good enough way to graphically browse various databases without having to pony up cash.

Thanks again to John Graham who found time enough for two sessions ;>

There’s a larger Flash version available, as well as a larger video.

Disclaimer: Eclipse is a client and sponsored this and other Eclipse Europa screencasts.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Categories: Development Tools, Open Source, RedMonkTV, Screencasts.

links for 2007-07-12

Categories: Links.