Bottom Up Business

So this is nothing new but I have been thinking about a frame of thought providing justification for bottom up institutions. The idea originally came from the fact that I wanted to do design management and realised that by doing the associated tasks I was not actually doing creative design but simply helping the designers I managed do more creative design. Of course this may happen though creative insight on behalf of the manager but the real point is that a manager's job is really just to help improve the potential of the designer. I think this generalises to other fields and to most systems in which there is hierarchy. 

Ok so that was probably not at all new, but I do think it is interesting that the higher paid workers really just help the lower paid workers perform in an effective manner.  I think this probably applies all the way up the hierarchy. I think if people thought about it in this way it might make some business stuff run a little more smoothly. And I think it would be really effective if governments acted in this fashion more. 

Thinking About 4 Kinds of Technology People

So, I think there are four basic groups of technology people:

1. Academic Users
2. Microsoft oriented IT People
3. New Web - New Tech People
4. Non Tech people

Now I am going to rant about them for a while. If you are not interested or do not want to waist time, do not read this post. 

Academic users are a group which are often made up of non technology based academics who simply need a computer to perform a specific task for whatever work they do. Of course this group exists in every demographic but I feel they are more common in academic settings. This group is quite strait forward, they are often architecture agnostic and they often are willing and interested in solving their own software problems by developing packages for the job. I think this is good in most cases and has in a few instances lead to the invention of great world changing things, i.e. the Internet and the bar code. At the same time however, I think they would benefit from using more existing systems and open standards. I feel all too often academic developed software is too specific, if it were generalised even a tiny bit a hole portion of the world could benefit. Of course I understand why this is the case, but I think it is a little saddening. 

The Microsoft oriented group, or people who are interested in corporate settings are generally IT workers who have been convinced that working with such a cause is acceptable. Personally, I think it is not that bad to have really ubiquitous and often complete solutions used by large companies however I feel they could also benefit a lot if the listened more to the open crowds. What I really think is interesting about this group though is that most of what they do is a secret to the world. The deal with things like Share Point and Lotus Notes and so forth. Obviously there are users who would also deal with these packages but I really think that it is only a select group of IT people who actually know what is going on with these packages. All the other IT people in the world are not interested because the are open source minded or are not dealing with enterprise solutions. They are an island, but a really well sustained island because there are a lot of big companies that pay a lot to use their solutions. These people really believe in the work they do and are often very supportive of Microsoft. 

When I say new web or new tech people I sort of mean the rest of the really tech inclined world. People who are interested in solutions that solve local problems nicely and conveniently. These people seem to like thinks that are with the times and tend to use a lot of new or modern technology service. Essentially I think these are the mainline technical consumer population. The thing I think is interest about this group is that they are usually not that loyal. I mean perhaps they are for one or two computers, but not for a lifetime. That is to say. I think many users are moving to Apple products at the moment are doing it for an overall functional value as opposed to many of the reasons people may have used Macs in the past 5 to 7 years (Application specific advantage and brand loyalty). So I think this will work well for Apple but perhaps not for long enough. I think that Linux products are getting really good. Ubuntu is about to release a new version and we can look forward to an other one in 6 months or so. The bugs are quickly being ironed out and the software is now being sold direct with a few popular brands (Dell and so on). I think windows market share is going to go down a bit, but OSX's will go down more. 

The non tech people are just the rest of the people who use computers. Elderly and people who are less familiar with IT. I think this is an interesting crowd because it is generally interested in the fastest and easiest solution as opposed to one that does more. I think this group is likely to buy computers from stores like Wall-mart or get them used from relatives or friends. They are good because they have low expectations however not so great because often they have really bad learning curves, they try to memorise how to check their email as opposed to trying to understand what is happening. So, simple reliable solutions are appropriate. I think at the moment, products like the G-PC is a great example of a good solution for this kind of person while for a long time most of them defaulted to windows. In the past few months I have installed Ubuntu for a few people in this situation. In any case. I think this group is not at all loyal to brands although it is a dyeing demographic because fewer and fewer people are not learning how to use computers. 

Okay so that was another really silly ramble. I think I thought it was worth writing because I think it is a slightly valid way to break down computer users. I think if it is at all accurate it indicates that Windows has a lot less of a stronghold than I expected and that OSX is not in a great position as it is sort-of a stepping stone while a more reliable and cheaper solution evolves. I wonder how this would effect the evolution of the desktop and innovation in interface design.

I should mention this hole argument is really simplified and so on and I am sure there are much better ways to identify demographics this sector.... comments....

Dialogue Mapping Webinar

This afternoon I took part in a dialogue mapping webinar which was fun though there was not a whole lot of new content. The things I found most interesting are as follows:

1. The idea that Dialogue mapping is there to essentially give context to the comments that are made by members of a discussion that do not really address the issue at hand but that are still relevant.
2. There fact that are tools which supposedly can be used to do collaborative mapping tasks - multi input mapping.

During the discussion I also came to think that making text chat based compendium tools would be good. I still really think that doing the tool set web enabled is really important but I think by adding various key features the value could improve greatly. The things I would want to see are:

1. In browser audio and video sharing 
2. Text (im) centric map creation, with things like text bubble drag and drop for mapping
3. Auto map optimisation software. ( I really think very few people do this well. And it would make a world of difference to the users)
4. Import export of data from compendium and others.
5. Retro-processing data and offering assistance in extracting a good map from any external or old data source. 
6. Keeping track of chronological data as well as issue based data as I think chronology is often overlooked in this kind of work. Perhaps even letting this inform the way maps render to some degree, to connote the flow of relevance in the conversation that lead to a given map.
7. Building of rich and mixed model data systems. For instance, easily incorporate another dynamic data from the Internet and allow piping via connections in Compendium. 
8. Use pain biased windowing, instead of the very wasteful window object model. 

So yeah. I hope that happens. If it does not I might just have to start a company to do it :-) Comments on what to put in such a thing would be really liked.

In other news, this whole thing being a webinar and all was interesting. I really think better remote meeting systems are a big part of the next frontier. 

Update: I now have a link to the complete webinar map series. Check it out if you are interested in this kind of thing. I think the Conversational versus Issue Based Structure.ppt offers some good insight for people who are really new this kind of mapping. 

Cars Without Engines

So for a little while I have been thinking about modular based vehicles that would take advantage of electric components. I considered a few possibilities and started building some mock ups in Sketchup. The main idea of what is represented so far in this mock up is to isolate as much of the drive and control hardware in modular pockets near the wheels. I think this could lead to more efficient chassis design and also improve repair ability of some aspects of a car. 

In any case. Here the further set of wheels is an earlier model including internal drive with off centre steering  and external suspension. Then I thought it might be interesting if the wheel assembly could be functional on a wider selection of devices so in the second, closer, set I have incorporated drive, steering and suspension into a hub mechanism that uses long life neodymium magnets set up as linear stepper motors for direct steering control. I think a drive system that has highly controllable step coils would be convenient as it could help in increasing efficient at higher speeds and improving torque at lower ones. This system is mounted at the rim level so I am going to look into solid, airless, tires to avoid needing any extra room at the rim.  The I-beams used to depict part of a chassis are not specific to the design and ere just used as modelling aids.

I am trying to develop this idea further before I actually test it or realise it won't work for some reason I have neglected to consider. I would love advice or comments if you have any. 

Business and Art

Today I started using PlanHQ for more serious work for a new venture at Adaptive Equipment. So far I do not really have a structured opinion of the toolkit however a feature I do sort of like is that the system forces you to give every project and sub project to a specific individual. I think this will really help people care about their work and be more strict about deadlines. We will see how well it works out. 

In other news. I found a really cool art blog that is almost continuously updated called FFFFound. There is some really great art on there of many kinds. I think mostly 2d stuff. I think there are a few too many posts to syndicate the feed. Does anyone know of any other interesting art blogs?

Mint - Great Software that Sucks

So.... I think Mint is a lovely idea and in some respects even a nice piece of work however I think it has a number of serious flaws and it highlights some of the problems with the banking industry today. 

1. As an application it is very minimal, it only offers a few features (though useful none the less) however it seems to be set up to look a lot bigger. I think it should either be set up as a small quick way of looking at one's budget situation or it should be set up as a tool that offers some interesting perspectives on the data it can get a hold of. I think with 5 application pages each linking to each other in about 10 places gives the illusion of more detailed information or more insight being available from the system.
   
2. The information displayed does not always cross pollinate well. On many pages there is information that offers a slightly deeper delve into the understanding of one's expenditure, however I think in many cases this data is not relevant to why people are actually on a page. For instance the section at the bottom of the account's page where expenditure relative to some norms is visualised is useful but I think it could be more context relevant in other places. This is not a huge problem but I think if the had a more structured approach to which information was displayed based on relevance there could be some advantageous outcomes.
3. The accounts set-up process is not well designed nor is the press sign up literature about the product. I think the site is great but they do very little to garner trust or to explain the relevance of what you are actually doing. For instance, when you sign up they immediately for full disclosure on all your bank accounts. This is understandable but at that point there is not a lot of information on trust or on what the information will actually be used for. Similarly, before signing up there is very little information on what the full gamut of the tools capabilities is. I expected to be able to manage my expenses, not just look at how much I had spent and there was not a hole lot of literature on the mint site which suggested it would not. In any case, I think more context for the user would help a lot. 
4. The data flow is way to slow to be useful for short term money management. I think it is grate for strategic changes to the way one spends money or for helping track long term expenditure however when it comes to day to day finances it is quite useless as the data is usually a few days old at a minimum. This was rather frustrating to me and lead me to the opinion that modern banks are quite awful. The amount of time they waste in transfers and reporting is a disgrace to information technology. There is no reason for this to be the case, we deal with real time things every day and in systems that are much more complex than an economic market. I hear part of the reason this lag is so common is because the money is amassed in the transfer process in an effort to add to a gross wealth through investment. This is pretty pathetic, can they really not think of a better way to make money. I think, at this point. If a bank started to provide the kind of service and speed that is expected from a web 2.0 company they would quickly become hugely popular. I think there are a few other things bank 2.0 could have and perhaps that would be a fun project to look at at some point.

So that was a rant. How wrong am I?

More Barcamp before Gainesville

I just found out that Barcamp Orlando is coming up and this one is going to be a two day event. I am really looking forward to it and already signed up for both days. Not sure if I will talk this time but I might just have to say a thing or two. Here is a little video the organisers put out: 


View Video on Vimeo.

In other news, I think this is a nice way to do Barcamp and I am starting to think about what should happen at our's here in Gainesville. 

Why isn't Del.icio.us Better Software

So today I got a delicious account and started importing some of my bookmarks from various other services. Quite quickly I became annoyed that the workflow seemed to be quite indirect. The first feature I should would be important was something like is found in email tagging and management software like gmail, in which one can check messages that one wants to effect. I think it is really stupid that there is not a basic set of batch tools in the standard interface. Especially after I have just imported 850 links and there are a fair few more to come. 

Secondly I found the response time in search and tag finding so slow. Surely they could make this a lot faster and potentially even do it as a Google Suggest like feature. The website is designed around such a specific use model, surely they could optimise the experience a bit more. 

Another thing that made me queasy was the lack of an in window solution for storing other peoples links. I think this is such crap. They could auto fill a number of the fields and just have a little pop over using ajax.

For now the last think I will complain about is the social aspect of the service. It really dose not feel social. It feels like being in a operators room from phone services of the past. I say this because in the standard view, the one were you do editing and building of your link base, there is very little social information. The only context given is how many people have also selected a given item. I think they could include more, for instance common tags on items with colour or size representing how common those tags were for those items.  Another method would be to have some kind of indicator of how related a given link, tag, or stored link, is to you and your community. 

In any case though, I really think they have not done a great job at making this service sing. I will continue using it and perhaps realise that everything I have said here is wrong. If you think so please tell me so in the comments. My Del.icio.us user name is Metophile as usual.

In other news, one of the groups I am working for at the moment is starting a consumer geared laser marking and manufacture service. We think iPods and so forth are a good starting point. Leave comments if you have any requests or ideas, we are testing things out currently.

People and working with them

Today I was informed that someone was interested in part of something I said a while back on Issue Mapping. I was a little surprised but as a result I have spent the afternoon thinking about work flow in compendium and also considering what it will actually take to build a good version of compendium online. I really wish they would do that. The basis of compendium's current collaborative tools is really week and if it were built to run in a browser I think the audience would also widen greatly. In any case. That is a project for later.

For now, I am thinking about business models but I would really love some help. I am trying to work out some good approaches to dealing with various problems and opportunities I think are ever more popular, and though this is not necessarily impossible, I am yet to find a particular business to start that is ideal. Most recently I considered the prospect of building a working community which essentially is not designed to provide any given service but more designed to provide open doors to services or products within the community. I think this is a little like a economy via social network, however I would like to have consideration for technologically isolated actins as well. We will see what comes of this, if you have any suggestions I would love to hear them.

The last lecture

This is a long but great talk. Everyone who has 95 minutes to spare should do so watching this lecture. 

In other news, I started using twitter as Metophile of course. I am finding it really great so far, it is surprising how useful the information the service provides actually is. 

In other other news FOWA was really great as was BarCamp Miami. I am looking into setting up a BarCamp Gainesville now. Interested people should comment or email me or something. 

And the last of other news, I am going to the Dry Tortugas for a few days for a quick holiday. 

Also, my work website (that I made) is now up, please leave comments on what can be improved.