First time here? Get updates by RSS feed or follow me on Twitter.

Close

« May 2008 | Main | July 2008 »

10 posts from June 2008

June 27, 2008

Poetry in powerpoint - one way to make your presentations zing

In 1877 William McGonagall, a handloom weaver working in Dundee, experienced what he would later describe as the most startling incident of his life. Divine revelation or psychotic episode, its message was clear - it was McGonagall's destiny to become a poet.

Unfortunately for McGonagall, it was his destiny to become the world's worst poet. In the remaining 25 years of his life, he wrote over 200 poems. They were all dreadful. Here's the last verse from his poem Captain Teach alias "Black Beard":

Black Beard derived his name from his long black beard,
Which terrified America more than any comet that had ever appeared;
But, thanks be to God, in this age we need not be afeared,
Of any such pirates as the inhuman Black Beard.

McGonagall's poetry is bad, but at least it's exceptionally bad. His prose is just plain bad. The poetic constraints unleashed his creativity (pirates and comets?), and shifted him from mediocrity to magnificence.

The structure of a sonnet or a haiku forces you to think, to organise and to cut. In film, the conventions are the architecture you build your cathedral on. Sure, the hero must overcome the obstacles, his best friend will turn out to be his enemy, and he'll get the girl in the end, but how and why, without cliché?

Structure turns poor material into middling, middling into good, and good into great. Wouldn't it be wonderful if we could bring that principle to business meetings? Well, we can. It's the premise behind pecha kucha. Get your point across in 20 slides of 20 seconds each, then stop. That's time enough to drill one, important idea into your audience.

We're holding a pecha kucha competition at Business of Software 2008. You've got another couple of days to enter. If you're chosen to speak then you'll get a free pass to the conference (and get to hear Seth Godin, Joel Spolsky, Jason Fried, and many others). Find out more at the Business of Software 2008 pecha kucha page.

If I like what I see then I might make pecha kucha compulsory at Red Gate. I'm also toying with forcing people to write all their e-mails as sonnets. I'll let you know how it goes.

June 23, 2008

The danger of stories - why you aren't as smart as you think you are

How likely is it that Apple buy Microsoft some time in the next 5 years? You'd probably assign a near-zero probability to this outcome. One in a million, or billion. It'd never happen.

Now let me tell you a story.

In the wake of the failed Yahoo merger and the botched Vista release, Microsoft's board kick out Steve Ballmer. They try to persuade Bill Gates to return as CEO. He refuses, preferring to focus on his philanthropic activities. The board decide that fresh blood is needed to invigorate Microsoft. They bring in Lou Gerstner, the man who turned around IBM in the 1990s. Ray Ozzie and a number of other senior executives resign in protest. Gerstner, under pressure from shareholders, decides that something big must be done. He fires 50% of Microsoft's 80,000 employees and splits the company up. He sells off various divisions: Nintendo buy the entertainment division, SAP snaps up the business software group, Google buys Microsoft Live, and so on. The rump that's left focusses on Microsoft's most profitable businesses: the operating system and Microsoft Office.

In the meantime, Apple goes from strength to strength. Apple releases a web-based office system in 2009. It starts stealing market share from Microsoft Office, just like Microsoft did from Wordstar almost two decades previously. Windows 2009 gets bogged down, and Apple's MacOS 11 and MacOS 12 start to hammer Microsoft on the desktop. By the time Windows 2009 ships in 2012, most server-based computing is taking place in Google and Amazon's cloud.

At the end of 2012, KKR, a private equity firm, makes Microsoft's shareholders an offer they cannot refuse. They take Microsoft private. KKR attempt to turn it around, but fail. In 2013, they try to sell it. Steve Jobs buys it, just to thumb his nose at Bill Gates.

How likely do you think that scenario is? Maybe it's one in a hundred, or one in a thousand. If you're normal, with the usual cognitive biases that make you normal, then you'll rate this scenario as more likely than the stark "Apple buy Microsoft" one.

Of course, that's illogical. My story is only one of many possible scenarios that could lead to Apple buying Microsoft, so it must have a smaller likelihood.

But it turns out that our minds aren't rational machines. My story is a series of concrete, incremental steps, each with a fairly low probability. To get the probability of the whole story you need to multiply all those small probabilities together. If you do that, you'll get a near infinitessimal probability. Our brains aren't very good at that multiplication though. Instead, we hear a good yarn, find it plausible, or at least possible, and then apply some kind of misguided heuristic to get the wrong answer.

The way we misjudge probabilities is explored by Massimo Piattelli-Palmarini in his excellent Inevitable Illusions - How Mistakes of Reason Rule Our Mind. He describes a study that Tversky and Kahneman, two cognitive psychologists, carried out in the middle of the Polish crisis in the early 1980s. They asked various political leaders and generals to evaluate the probability that the USA would withdraw its ambassador from the Soviet Union. They then asked the same people to evaluate the probability that both (a) The USSR would invade Poland AND (b) as a consequence, the USA would withdraw its ambassador from the USSR.

The generals said the second scenario was more likely than the first. If you think about it, that's nonsensical: the second scenario is a subset of the first scenario. The probability of the USSR invading Poland AND the USA withdrawing its ambassador is less likely than just the USA withdrawing its ambassador. But the generals' brains didn't spot that, and neither would yours. They heard the story, and found it more convincing than the statement.

Stories are powerful, persuasive and ever more fashionable tools. They're a great way to put across your point of view. Telling a story is often a better way to convince others than presenting dry facts, logic and analysis. If you're trying to raise capital from VCs, then you should tell a story. If you're trying to convince your boss that your new strategy will succeed, then tell a story. If you want to persuade potential customers to buy the software that you're selling, then tell them a story.

But if you're listening rather than telling then be careful. Stories can be dangerous. It's easy to construct a story - intentionally or otherwise - that buries the facts and misleads an audience.

Free Exchange 2007 eBook

If you're an Exchange admin then you'll be interested in a free eBook that Simple-Talk are giving away. It's 10 chapters, 350 pages, compiled from five of Wiley's most popular Exchange 2007 books. It covers the following topics:

    * Exchange Server Architecture
    * Applying Planning Principles to Exchange Sever 2007
    * Exchange Server Administration
    * Installing Exchange Server 2007
    * Scaling Upward and Outward
    * Sizing Storage Groups and Databases
    * Defining Policies and Security Procedures
    * Planning a Backup and Recovery Solution for Exchange Server 2007
    * Planning Exchange Server 2007 Security
    * Creating, Managing Highly Available Exchange Server Solutions

You can download it from the following URL:

http://www.simple-talk.com/exchange/

June 18, 2008

Business of Software 2008 - provisional program

I've just published the provisional program for Business of Software 2008. There are some gaps, and I might still shift the speakers around a bit, but there's enough to give a good idea of what the conference is about.

A couple of highlights:

Seth Godin will be speaking on why marketing is too important to be left to the marketing department

Joel Spolsky will be speaking about iPod or Zune - which are you building?

Paul Kenny isn't as well known as Seth and Joel, but his talk on sales 101 is going to be essential listening.

You can download the full program from http://downloads.businessofsoftware.org/BusinessOfSoftware2008.pdf

June 09, 2008

Cory Doctorow coming to Cambridge (UK)

Cory Doctorow, an editor of Boing Boing, is coming to Cambridge, UK on July 22nd to speak about life in the information economy. It's part of a series of lectures that Red Gate is co-sponsoring.

Here's some more information:

We made a bet, some decades ago, that the information economy would be based on buying and selling (and hence restricting copying of) information. We were totally, 100 percent wrong, and now the world’s in turmoil because of it. What does a copy-native economy look like? How do everyone from barbers to musicians become richer, more fulfilled and more civilly engaged in a real information society. And what do we do about the fact that a couple of dinosauric entertainment companies are determined to screw it up?

Cory Doctorow is a blogger, science fiction writer and journalist. He is an editor of Boing Boing, the 11th best blog in the world (according to Time Magazine). He was the 2006-2007 Canadian Fulbright Chair in Public Diplomacy at the USC Center on Public Diplomacy. He founded the software company Opencola which was later sold to the Open Text Corporation. He also writes regularly for The Guardian newspaper.

It's free, but you need to book on the Cambridge Business Lectures web site.

Irony #3 - gambling and addiction conference to be held in Sin City

Last week I blogged about the IEEE not being able to convert strings, and how the Institute of Design at Stanford can't design an e-mail subscription form.

Today's ironic link is via mindhacks. The 9th annual NCRG conference on gambling and addiction is being held in ...

... Las Vegas.

An ideal place to discuss the "latest developments in pathological gambling research and responsible gaming programming".

June 06, 2008

When the details betray your vision: oh, the irony

A few days ago I blogged about how the IEEE - the "world's leading professional advancement of technology" is unable to convert a lowercase string to an uppercase one.

The Institute of Design at Stanford is the latest to shoot itself in the foot with the shotgun of irony. The d.school seems like a really great place. They "believe great innovators and leaders need to be great design thinkers". They "want the d.school to be a place for Stanford students and faculty in engineering, medicine, business, the humanities, and education to learn design thinking and work together to solve big problems in a human centered way." These are all things I believe in too.

So I try to sign up to their newsletter. I enter my e-mail address and I hit 'join'. And here's what I get:

d.school

Apparently my "data is about to be sent", but I can cancel if I want to. I do, and get this:

d.school

Grand visions are great, but easy. It's the details that count, and they're hard.

June 05, 2008

The semantic web - the future of search or a dead end?

The other night I heard Rick Rashid, head of Microsoft Research worldwide, speak on the future of technology. His talk was so good that I'm going to try to persuade him to speak at Business of Software 2008 (only 24 hours until the early bird discount expires by the way, so book now).

A couple of the highlights of Rick's talk were:

  • His demonstration of Photosynth. This app takes thousands of photos of an object or a scene and then stitches them together to produce a three dimensional view that you can fly around and zoom in to. They can't do it yet, but one day you'll be able to upload your own photos and construct your own 3D model. You'll also be able to take a photo of an object - the Seattle Space Needle, for example - and the software will recognise where you are and tell you more about what you've photographed. For now, there are a bunch of 3D scenes you can look at, including St Mark's square in Venice and the space shuttle Endeavour.
  • The World Wide Telescope. Microsoft have constructed a digital map of the sky from terabytes of data from the Hubble Space Telescope, the Sloan Digital Sky Survey and many other sources. You can use this virtual telescope to explore the heavens, panning and zooming thousands of light years away.

The best part, for me, was Rick's answer to Hermann Hauser's question about the future of the semantic web. Rick claimed little knowledge on the topic, but still managed to talk eloquently for several minutes. He said (I paraphrase, and any errors are mine) that the semantic web reminded him of research into natural language processing. For several decades, researchers have tried to work out ever-more complex grammars and rules to understand human language, but most researchers - the ones that are making progress anyway - have abandoned this avenue and are focussing on statistical, machine learning. This essentially involves dumping terabytes of data into complex algorithms and then using the results. Nobody understands the detailed internal connections that the models make, but the outputs seem promising.

Similarly, the semantic web relies on humans defining schemas for different objects. For example, Freebase has volunteers trawling Wikipedia's unstructured data and structuring it, turning the free text of film stars' biographies into structured tables of names, dates of birth and film titles [UPDATED: Freebase uses statistical methods as well as the community]. The problem with this approach is that the schemas, and the links between them, are man-made. Rick Rashid's point is that we've just ended up with another set of bad data, but in a data structure. We may well find that computational, statistical models cope much better with understanding data than any fixed structure that a human can come up with.

Altogether it was an excellent talk: a strong mix of fantastic content and good presentation. Sign up to my RSS feed and I'll let you know if I persuade Rick to speak in Boston.

June 03, 2008

The future of technology: why Turkish delight beats the nanobots

I've been invited to speak on a panel of the future of IT this evening. In a moment of ego-driven weakness, and because I'll get the chance to meet Rick Rashid, Head of Microsoft Research worldwide, I accepted. It's not a topic I feel qualified to pontificate on, so I've spent the past few days booking up. Hopefully I won't make a total tit of myself.

I feel like the British ambassador in a far-away country. The story goes that a journalist called him up one December and asked him what he'd like for Christmas. A memo had gone round the week before, reminding all staff about the dangers of bribery. The guidelines, it emphasised, were to not accept anything worth more than $50, or that couldn't be consumed in a single sitting. With the rules in mind, he told the journalist that he wouldn't mind a small box of Turkish Delight. Not too large, mind.

The next week, he opened the newspaper. It described what the ambassadors of different countries were hoping for at Christmas. The French ambassador hoped for world peace. The US ambassador wanted a cure for cancer. The German ambassador wanted an end to poverty. And the British ambassador wanted a small box of Turkish delight.

Over the past few days I've read about printed polymer displays. I've looked into the implications of unlimited storage, and cheap, multi-touch screens. I've Googled Doug Engelbart and Ted Nelson. I've skimmed books by Alvin Toffler and John Naisbitt. I've watched a 3-D teleconference that Cisco held last year. Will in-car internet be the next big thing? How will programming languages change to cope with massively distributed systems? Are data-flow languages the way we're heading? What about quantum cryptography? Are the social trends more important than the technology? Are we just obsessed by techno-fetishism?

And then, this morning, I try to join the IEEE. I enter my chosen user name, and click next. I get the following screen:


Apparently the IEEE - the self-named "world's leading professional association for the advancement of technology" - cannot figure out how to convert a lowercase string to an uppercase one, and they think that error SBL-EXL-00151 is a sensible way to tell me their problem.

Then I log on to my internet banking system. I want to see the transactions in the last month. Of course, there's no option to view the last month, so I enter dates from 3/5/08 to 3/6/08 (I'm in the UK). I get the following error:

Error(s) occurred

The 'from' date entered is invalid. (B1010-BR)

Not only can HSBC not convert my input of 3/5/08 to their expected input 03/05/2008, but they can't even figure out that this is one 'error' and not multiple 'errors'. And they insult me by claiming it's my 'error' when it's clearly their sloppy programming. But, hey, that B1010-BR number is really useful.

There's an element of grumpiness in my griping, but there is a serious point here too. Innovation isn't always - or evenly mainly - about the whizz-bang of nanobots and artificial intelligence. To take an idea from the lab and turn it into a usable product that people will buy can take years - if not decades - of hard, sustained effort. The multi-touch displays we're drooling over now were first demonstrated twenty years ago. The mouse is 40 years old. Electronic paper was demonstrated at Xeroc PARC in the 1970s. The people who grind away at the job of turning ideas into products are not the same people who have the startling insights, or who tell us fantastic stories about the future of machine vision or the semantic web. They're the journeyman software developers who still cannot figure out how to remove the spaces and dashes in credit card numbers.

So here's my Turkish delight; what I'd like the future of IT to be. I'd like us to improve the craft of software development. To stop producing unusable, patronizing software, and to start writing well-tested, well-designed software that makes people smile.

But I reckon that's a lot less likely to come true than machine vision, nanobots and free, wireless Internet access.

June 01, 2008

It's the other stuff that counts: why technology isn't as important as you think

I started using my new toy yesterday. The iRex iLiad is an eBook reader. What makes it special is its use of electronic ink. It's a reflective display: the screen behaves much like a slightly grey printout from a medium quality laser printer. It's easy on the eye, high resolution, and you can read it outdoors.

Here's the eBook version of Sebastian Faulk's Devil May Care with the hardback on one side and my laptop on the other. Click the image to view it full size. Note the glare from the flash on the laptop's screen, and its absence on the iLiad.

Img_0289_2

Here it is again, next to the hardback:

Img_0290

The reader is about the same height and width as a hardback book, but shallower and lighter. Turning a page takes a second or two, but not much longer than turning the page of a real book.

Overall, it's a fantastic bit of technology. From using it for a day, I've drawn the following conclusions:

1) Electronic ink is the next big thing. In the next few years everybody's going to be using a device like the iLiad

2) But they won't be using the iRex iLiad

It also illustrates an important point:

3) It's not hard core technology that counts. Technology can be important, even essential, but it's the other stuff that's important.

Let me explain.

eBooks are tomorrow's big thing. And always will be. After a decade of hype that was the conclusion I'd reached, but when Bill Buxton showed me his iLiad a few months ago I knew I was wrong. The technology is not round the corner: it is here right now. You can go to Borders, or log on to Amazon, and buy an electronic book that is smaller, more convenient and with more capacity  than a traditional book. When I travelled to Boston last year I took the following: a bunch of academic papers about branding, a copy of the Harvard Business Review, The Tipping Point, Slaughterhouse Five and the Golden Compass. By weight, it was about half of my luggage. Next year, when I return, I'll be carrying twice as many books in a device the weight of small paperback. Within the next few months we'll have flexible displays too. Forget circuit boards: the electronics will be printed onto polymer sheets using ink-jet printers. Plastic Logic's factory is being built and will be producing displays this year. By April next year, you'll be able to buy a flexible, wireless display that you can roll up and carry around in your pocket, probably for well under $100.

Technically, electronic ink is awesome. Creating a reflective, electronic, paper-like display was an enormously difficult problem that has taken decades to crack. Printing electronics onto plastics is an equally hard problem.

But so what?

We don't buy products because of the clever technology in them, or because they've taken decades to reach fruition. We buy products to solve our problems. You won't buy an eBook reader because the display contains millions of tiny two-tone charged nanoparticles. You'll buy it because it you're running out of shelf space at home, or because you don't want to lug hardback books around on holiday, or because you want to be able to read today's edition of the Guardian from Kinshasha.

The iRex iLiad is 99% of the way there. They (or rather E Ink Corporation, who manufacture the display component) have done all the hard work. But they've neglected the 1% that's important:

1) The software sucks. If it's going to compete with a physical book, it's got to be easy to use. As easy as a book, in fact. But there are too many niggles. The interface is full of icons that are non-intuitive and impossible to discover. The iLiad has wireless networking, but you can't download books from the Internet. You need to download them to your computer and then transfer them across. You can't search through eBooks. It has a pen so you can write notes on blank sheets, but you can't annotate books.

2) The device is too expensive. At $900 this simply isn't mass market enough. Of course, the technology will rapidly come down in price, but iRex could have subsidised the cost of device through book sales, much like the games console manufacturers do.

3) The content is too expensive. A hardback copy of The Devil May Care costs $14, little of which is profit. The electronic copy costs $17.95, all gravy. Somebody is being greedy.

4) There's not enough content. People want the content, not the medium.

Sure, all of these problems are hard to solve. But they're not as hard to solve as figuring out how to build a paper-like electronic display. They are design problems (creating a good interface), commercial problems (reducing the cost of the device) and licensing problems (persuading publishers to make their content available digitally).

Nobody has cracked all of those problems yet. But somebody will. Somebody will produce a device that looks so good that it appeals beyond geeks and that's as easy to use as a physical book. They'll persuade publishers to make their content digital, and they'll work out a commercial business model. Who will do it? My money is on Apple or Amazon.

Take a look at other successful products and companies and you find other examples about how it's not the technology that matters. It's the other stuff. Google succeeded not because of their search technology but because, with adwords, they figured out how to make money from search. Microsoft succeeded, initially, not because they had a better operating system, but because they cut a licensing deal with IBM. The Nintendo Wii is a success not just because of the clever accelerometers built into every controller, but because they made a conscious, commercial, decision to target consumers who weren't hardcore gamers. The iPod succeeded not because of its small hard drives, or its thumb wheel, but because of the way it lets consumers download cheap, legal music of their choice to their MP3 players. Digg is successful not because of a technical innovation, but because of an incremental social innovation - letting people choose the stories they like.

After only a day, I'm hooked on my iLiad. It's 99% fantastic. But I'll ditch it the minute somebody looks beyond the narrow technical problem and finishes off that extra 1%.

If you're a geek, you've probably got your head buried in technology. Lift it up out of the sand and look around you. If you're going to succeed - if you're going to be Apple and not iRex - then you need to spend less time on the technology and focus on the other stuff.

About Neil Davidson

Joint CEO of Red Gate Software and organiser of the Business of Software conference. Read More.

Creative Commons

Creative Commons License

This work is licenced under a Creative Commons Licence.

Business of Software 2010

a Joel on Software conference

Boston
October 4th-6th

Subscribe to conference updates and get a free ebook!

View more posts