Thinking Tech

I guess the question of the day is, "Why would anyone want to change their web design?" After all, the old design was pretty decent. I know we spent a ton of money on it (it was one of those things that went about 300% over budget, and we only got about 50% of what we originally bargained for). Why would we pay for something like that? Why didn't we insist on getting the entire project completed? Answer: we had already waited 6 months longer than the 6 weeks we were promised for the design to be completed, and we had to get the new site up and running.

Enough on that soap box, I guess.

Anyway, the new site design from DGG uses CSS and less graphics. That makes it faster, load quicker, and gives us opportunities to change it rapidly in the future. In addition, it makes it easier to change. So here's the new design. Hope you like it.

If you don't like it, I can give you the name of the designer that did the old site. Maybe sometime in this lifetime you can get them to design one for you [name withheld to protect the guilty]!

A friend asked me Friday, "If you're busy, why are you doing seminars and mailings?" Good question. For all businesses.

The traditional answer for consulting firms has been to stop marketing once they were busy. And--as I taught CPE classes years ago--it assures that the work load is never equal. In our business, the average time for a client to decide to move forward on a project can be anywhere from a few months to a few years. Our business isn't like retail, where Sunday's newspaper ads bring in Monday's customers. What we do today brings in clients two years from now.

So if we're busy today and we ignore new business, we're going to be out of business tomorrow. So, at DGG, we're never too busy to discuss another project. And we appreciate any referrals you may send our way

Ok, so someone ought to ask me, "As busy as you seem to be, how do you have time for blogging?" My answer is the same as I've heard from others in the past when I've asked similar, "How do you have time for..." questions. I hated it when I got it; I hate it when someone at a seminar says it; now here I go blogging the same thing:

I don't have time NOT to blog. It's relaxing for me, but more than anything else, it FORCES me to keep up on the technology. It FORCES me to remember to tell our clients about the things that I think will affect their businesses. It HELPS me focus my own thinking.

So there, another meaningless answer to a very good question.

In the running for the tackiest use of the Internet...and one that almost makes me ashamed to be part of the Internet revolution is the Beautiful People site.

Beautiful People Website

Here's the concept: If you're a fashion model, or beautiful enough to be one, you probably want to join a dating service (member organization) that only allows in equally beautiful people. So you'd--of course--apply to be a member of Beautiful People. Wait...excuse me...wave of nausea coming over me...ok, there, it passed.

I saw this in passing on ET or some equally obnoxious television program, and had to check it out....and it's real. Take a look at the "newest members." A couple of these were on the show last night. Most of these photos look like glamour shots taken for a modeling portfolio...oh, except for the one gal that has the "red eye" (Produced when a flash from a camera bounces off the back of the retina giving an appearance to the eyes something like you might expect from Devil-spawn.)

The "member" on the TV promptly let us know that, "If you want to meet people, everyone wants to meet people like themselves. Beauty is just like any other thing about you, it's infused [sic]" Hey, I think she may mean "inherited," but from what I could see of her lips and other body parts, she may actually mean "infused."

In a culture where we have teenage girls starving themselves and sticking their fingers down their throats, and boys taking steroids that could damage things they need later in life, the one thing we DON'T need is a site where members get to vote to decide whether new applicants are "beautiful" enough to join.

Think I'd rather have a relationship with someone less infused...

If you own a Dell laptop, check out the following article. Turns out that Sony manufactured several million batteries that have the unique feature of bursting into flame. Flame on! (Sorry!)

News from PC Magazine: Dell To Announce Massive Laptop Battery Recall

Be forewarned, I'm probably going to make someone mad with this one...but that's OK. No one ever accused me of lacking an opinion. There was an article in the Wall Street Journal a couple of years ago about the latest fad: online networking. In the article, they mentioned two web sites: Ryze (www.ryze.com) and LinkedIn (www.linkedin.com). Both of these were to be like mixers...only on-line. You could go to the websites, find people interested in the same things you were, and network.

Well, LinkedIn caters to professionals who want to protect their email from SPAM. So other than allowing the producers of The Bachelor to SPAM their members, the list is pretty protected. Ryze, on the other hand, seems to be inhabited almost exclusively by vocal MLM sales people and "spiritual success" advisors. I spend more time deleting their "flame" wars than sharing useful information.

So look me up on LinkedIn. I'd like to see you there. Until Ryze revises its target audience, I'd stay away...unless you're selling the latest meditation technique guaranteed to earn me $50Million. In that case, just skip Ryze and email me directly. You know the address. Right?

Telephone records obtained by "pretexting"? HP Board members involved? Journalists? Posing as the person whose call phone records you want?

This stuff sounds more like something a jealous spouse would do than an international company. But HP was so worried about where the media leaks were coming from that they did this and contemplated more to discover the names of the guilty.

Although HP blames outside investigators, it's hard to know exactly what happened when. Take a look at the article below for more information.

HP CEO to Testify to House Panel on Leak Scandal

I was just going to put up a quick post about anti-spam list non-profit Spamhaus being ordered to pay $11.7 million in damages. Spamhaus publishes a list of sites known to produce Spam, which anti-SPAM software programs use to block Spam from these sites. Seems they included e360insight's address in their list. This hacked off e360insight, an email marketing company (!?). I leave it to you to determine whether e360insight is a Spammer or not.

Meanwhile, I was reading the article on the InformationWeek site and suddenly I was redirected to a page that played a sort-of video promoting HP blade servers. If I was ever going to buy an HP blade server, I won't now. Shame on you, InformationWeek. If I wanted to read an ad for HP servers, I know the HP web address. I'd go there. What in the world are you doing?

Oh, here;s the summary of the article from InformationWeek:

A U.S. District Court judge ordered anti-spam organization Spamhaus to pay $11.7 million in damages against an e-mail marketing company. The U.K.-based Spamhaus said the U.S. court had no jurisdiction, and ignored it. Now, anti-spam advocates worry that the judge might order ICANN to eliminate the Spamhaus domain.

U.S. Court Order Could Boost Spam By 50 Billion Daily - News by InformationWeek

In their defense, it isn't just Microsoft. I'm still stinging from the software vendor (name withheld to protect the guilty) who threatened to fire employees if they published the internally developed list of 100+ features from the DOS product that weren't included in the Windows version. And that's been ten plus years ago.

Anyway...

I just got back from Directions 2006. It's a VAR created, staffed, and sponsored conference for Microsoft Dynamics NAV (the software formerly known as Navision). Navision is a great product, acquired a couple of years ago by Microsoft. It consistantly wins awards for features, and meets the needs of many businesses that otherwise would need much more expensive software. But that's for the sales guys...

Anyway...

Version 5.x of Dynamics NAV is coming out in early 2007 (5.0 announced in March, 5.1 to be released, probably in November 2007 [just in time for Christmas]). A few years ago, Navision had announced that a major revision was planned for "release after next." By my calculation, since the current version was 3.x, that would be version 5.x. There were rumors that they had actually prototyped it in Denmark (where Navision was headquartered before the acquisition).

And now we're almost there...5.x is coming out. To be completely honest, it looks great. They headline the new features with a feature that I personally think our clients will all want--purchase order and sales order approval, with the ability to comment. They aren't calling it "workflow," but they're awful close. The first release, 5.0, looks pretty much like 4.0, which is good for clients that have trouble adapting to new things. And--better yet--there are some really nice features, and fixes of some things that VARs have been asking for. Like inventory costing, for example.

Anyway...

It's 5.1 that people are worried about. It looks different. The new user interface (UI) is built in a Microsoft technology called SharePoint Server. They call it role based. This means that an accounts receivable clerk will have a different screen than an accounts payable clerk or a salesperson. In theory it's great. In a demo this morning, one of the Microsoft pundits showed how you could create a sales order in 7 clicks in the 5.1 UI that took 18 clicks in the 5.0 UI. Good deal. But it looks different. Microsoft has done "usability testing." They've brought in real people to work with the software, and they claim that all of them love it.

Also, they've backed off the idea that they'll replace the original Navision development tools with all-new, all-better Microsoft tools. They're leaving most of the old tools in place.

I just wonder if somewhere there's a list of 100+ things that they don't want us to know about. It's what they don't tell me that bothers me. Because I usually find out about the time our clients find out, and then the Microsoft employees are nowhere to be found. By that time, it's my problem, not theirs. It's what they don't say...

Here we go again. Deja vu. Same song, different verse.

Microsoft's newly released IE 7 (Internet Explorer 7) has a bug that allows it to be tricked by malicious code. What makes this worse is (a) Microsoft has touted the security in this release of IE, and (b) the bug is an old one that appeared first in IE 6.

eWeek.com reports,

The company has constructed a test that shows how IE 7 can be tricked by a malicious Web site to spoof the content of a pop-up window opened on a trusted site.

Secunia said the vulnerability was confirmed on a fully patched system with Internet Explorer 7.0 and Microsoft Windows XP SP2 (Service Pack 2).

Where was quality control at Microsoft when this happened? Come on guys, when are you going to get this right?

Old Window Injection Flaw Reappears in IE 7

Years ago, we talked a lot about vapor-ware. It was software that had been announced. It would be out "real soon now," as the PC-Magazine inside joke went. "Real soon now" came to refer to a host of products beginning with dBase IV, which appeared nearly four years after the initially announced release date. If PC-Mag said, "It'll be available Real Soon Now," you knew that you might see it in your lifetime.

Today it seems that vaporware should be extended to include hardware as well as software. Microsoft announces a version of software years before its planned release date, then releases it late and with fewer features. Yes, I know, we'd rather have the software now with some features than later with all the features, but the features promised for version 2.0 have a tendancy to appear (finally!) in version 3.0.

I for one am tired of one company announcing a new product just to get people to wait for their product rather than a competitor's. And I've seen plenty of clients buy software based on slick pitches about what was coming in the next version. Some of them are still waiting.

The rule is: don't buy software on the basis of features promised. Buy software (and hardware, spouses, couches, etc.) based on features available today.

It'll keep you out of trouble.

If you type on one of these little gadgets (I have a Treo), you'll feel it in the fleshy part of your hand just under your thumb. It's been dubbed "blackberry thumb." And now, Hyatt has a massage therapy for it. Makes you want to schedule a few days in the local Hyatt...not.

This is, of course, important news. But I just saw a WSJ alert about a decline in the Producer Price Index. Better focus on what that means for the economy. Maybe I can read it on my Treo while I get my hand massage...

New massage for "BlackBerry Thumb"? - More Health News - MSNBC.com

A friend called over the weekend. She had just purchased a new PC. I'll leave the brand unnamed, since it doesn't matter in this case.

She was installing the 6 month AOL trial that came with the PC. It asked for a credit card number. Free for 6 months...then we start charging you. And, of course, you could sign up on line, but you had to write down the number to call and cancel the service when the free trial was up.

Also, it came with an Office TRIAL. My friend said, "I bought a PC with Windows XP. Doesn't that include word processing?" Well...unless you count the built-in WordPad program, no. And you'd be surprised how many people don't know this. Bundling PC programs with the PC has produced confusion for many people.

I know, you're not one of those people. You're reading this blog.

But it's enough to make someone Google "free office software." You might find StarOffice from Sun ($70), or Open Office (free).

There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so. William Shakespeare. Hamlet. Act ii. Scene 2.

Sometimes my blog posts are generated by things that happened. Today is not one of those days. I'm thinking--frankly--about how businesses go about hiring employees successfully. And, specifically, that I think I've been unsuccessful as many times as I've been successful.

Don't get me wrong, when I've hired good people, they turn out to be really, really good. But the question is how to do this with every hire.

What I'm looking for I can capture in a sentence: Give me employees who can think! If they can think, everything else seems to work out.

I think and think for months and years. Ninety-nine times, the conclusion is false. The hundredth time I am right. Albert Einstein

Think with me about this. What do you think is effective in hiring? Should we ask Microsoft questions: Why are manhole covers round? How many gas stations are in the continental US?

Or should we give tests? Personality? Aptitude? Technology?

And, yes, we were interviewing today, but that's not what generated this post. At least, I don't think it did.

A client emailed me earlier and mentioned an article on embezzlement that I published first on the blog, then later in some of the DGG newsletters. He got the newsletter, and used the article, with an appropriate highlight, as evidence for the District Attorney. Turned out that the employee confessed and made restitution.

Someone really does read the stuff I write...

Anyone else out there?

I'm sure most people have heard about the backdated stock options scandle by now. Seems that several really large companies (Apple, United Health, etc.) issued stock options, and chose dates for the stock options that corresponded with annual low prices of their stocks.

This had two effects:

(a) Employees who received the options whose value had increased got an instant increase in pay, and

(b) The corporation got to value the stocks at the lower price rather than the current price when the stock option was actually granted.

Lest you think this is unusual, since then over 150 companies seem to have gotten embroiled in the same scandle.

My parents taught me better: They called it "lying." And it was wrong.

What were they thinking?

Suppose I miss a day blogging. Like yesterday.

Should I post today what I would have written if I had written the post that I didn't write yesterday? Or should I just back date it and pretend like I remembered to post?

But that would be dishonest...

Monetize. Merriam-Webster defines it. It DOES NOT mean to "make a profit on." You cannot monetize a web site. You cannot monetize a blog. You cannot monetize a podcast. In the first place, there's nothing there to make a coin out of and you're not redeeming any corporate debt.

You can make a profit on the things above.

Geeeezzzzz. Has profit become a four-letter word? We're now using an euphemism for profitability?

Ok, perhaps I'm being a little reactive here. Perhaps you can stretch the first definition below ("to coin into money") to mean to convert into money. But that's a reach. Coin means to make a PHYSICAL coin.

We're butchering the language. Kinda reminds me of the transition of the word "impact" (which, by the way, was ONLY a noun for many years...you could say "make an impact on something," but it made no sense to "impact something."). I resisted (and resist) that to this day. This one seems like more of a reach.

Make a profit...do not monetize. Profit good...monetize bad.

Oh, and while you're at it, laugh a little.

Definition of monetize - Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Happy Thanksgiving!

With so much to be thankful for, may we remember that not all have what we have come to take for granted.

Yesterday a client called. Another vendor had called him to say that he needed to make a decision quickly because if he made the purchase before the end of the year, he could use Section 179 to save enough tax money to make the payments for 2007. He wanted to know if he should hurry up and buy the software we were talking to him about to take advantage of this. And was it available for our software, too?

Right. I hear this one every year. In fact, our suppliers call and encourage us to use this one. And it makes me want to puke!

And, yeah, Congress and the IRS makes rules that only work for one product. That's what they made bribery for... [just kidding here...sortof]

Before I say [ok, write] anything, let me say [write] that I was a CPA in a former lifetime, but I haven't practiced for years. I keep up with these things in general...so for anything you decide to do, check with a CPA or tax advisor that knows your specific situation.

In the first place, assuming that you can save taxes from Section 179 is a bad assumption without knowing a good bit about the company. For example, there is an absolute limit on the amount of deduction you can take per year. If the company just bought two 18-wheelers, they are probably using the entire deduction.

Of course, by the time they figure out that they can't deduct the extra assets purchased, they are in the next year, and it's the CPAs fault. After all, the salesperson TOLD them to check with their CPA before making a decision. Nope, no liability there.

There's also a limit on the deduction equal to profit. That is, you can't deduct more than your profit. If you're a typical small business, the owner may be taking the profit as a salary and getting a W-2. Unless the owner can buy the assets (and take the liability) personally [CONSULT YOUR CPA], there's no profit to take the Section 179 deduction against.

And finally, the Section 179 deduction has been available EVERY YEAR since I entered public accounting practice 20+ years ago. The limits have changed (gone up). In some years there has been investment tax credit (that goes directly against tax owed). But there has been a Section 179 available EVERY YEAR for the last 20 years. YOU PROBABLY WON'T LOSE IT BY WAITING A YEAR [CONSULT YOUR TAX ADVISOR].

Sleazy...says me.

So, here's my advice...if someone uses this on you as a closing technique, ask them if you can just take it next year. While they're thinking that over...RUN...

After all, the Democrats are in control and the tax rates may go up. You could save more by NOT buying the asset this year.

My $0.02.

Please, please say it ain't so! Surely no one would hack a computer and risk jail for Chester Bennington's cell phone records. But evidently, someone did.

Am I showing my age if I ask what Linkin Park is?

Feds: Linkin Park fan hacks phone data - Yahoo! News

I thought only kids got strep. Oh well, I've evidently got it. Had a routine doctor appointment, and a little runny nose one minute...the next I've got strep.

It's a good time to get a little rest, but I hate being sick. I'd rather work than be sick!

Ok, before you think this is my wish list, I've had my eye on this little orange tie number for a couple of months. Problem is, I can't buy it for myself. I was brought up in public accounting and taught the ditty:

Early to bed, early to rise, work like heck and wear a red tie.

I don't own a blue dress shirt...all of mine are white. All of my suits are dark; I've never owned a summer weight suit of tan or olive.

So my problem is...I really like orange ties on other people. I know I'd wear one if someone color savvy picked it out. But everytime I go to buy one for myself, I bomb out.

Too forward thinking...

I don't have that problem with technology. I'm still running Vista Beta 2 on my home system with the Beta version of Office 2007. Clothing...conservative. Technology...bleeding edge. Politics...I'm not saying...

On the other hand, maybe you should just get me the phaser...here's the list for your techie friends.

IT Stocking Stuffers

The Thinking Tech website will be coming down for maintenance work from the 29th of December to the 1st of January. I'll keep posting until then, and will see you in January.

I'm not sure if Steve Jobs and Apple are stupid or just bumbling. If the press is right, Cisco has a pretty firm grasp on the name iPhone...firm enough that Apple was negotiating over "sharing" it. Surely Apple doesn't think that just because it owns the trademark (and 70% or so of the market) on one device that begins with an "i" that it can just prefix any old name out of the telephone directory with it.

Apparently, someone owns rights to iTV, because Jobs announced Apple TV as the name of the new device they'll be releasing.

But why in the world would you have a major announcement of a device that used a name that another company owned? Particularly if you were negotiating with that company over an agreement to use the name?

Did Apple want to be sued?

Cisco Sues Apple over Use of iPhone Name

I'm posting this without comment. You should read it. And remember when you do that the guy writing it is a MICROSOFT EXECUTIVE!

Wow!!

Microsoft Watch - Operating Systems - Allchin's 'Buy a Mac' E-Mail Exposed

As they say in the legal shows, let's stipulate to the fact that the Apple Mac is more stable than the PC. It's pretty much a fact. All the tech sites like Engadget and Leo Laporte's This Week In Tech (TWiT) say it. Don't get me wrong, there are a few Windows loyalists out there that think Windows can do no wrong.

But here's my $0.02: Before you critique Windows instability, recognize that Apple controls 100% of the product. They don't deal with 100s of video cards. They don't deal with processors and motherboards that come out AFTER the product is released that they're expected to support. They don't deal with drivers written by hardware manufacturers that are unstable.

So when you criticize Windows, take everything that's relevant into account.

I thought email SPAM was bad...until I started blogging. Now I spend a few minutes every day (or several minutes every other day) deleting SPAM from the comments and trackback logs in this blog.

A comment is...well, a comment. Someone posts something about a blog entry I wrote.

A trackback is intended to be a link from someone else's blog to mine. They occur when someone writes about an entry I made and puts a link into their blog to my blog. Most blogging software then sends a trackback which lets me know that someone out there agrees (or sometimes disagrees) with something I wrote.

A trackback also results in a link from my blog to the other blog that sent the trackback.

One of the reasons SPAMmers do trackbacks has to do with search engines. The more incoming links they can generate, the better their sites come up in search engines like Google.

Another reason is that you might actually click on a link here and wind up at a site selling Viagra or a consciousness-altering drug.

But I delete them...I just hope I don't miss legitimate trackbacks and comments with all the SPAM.

McAfee releases an update with an "undocumented feature:" it locks Lotus Notes users out of their mailboxes. This is the kind of stuff that drives us CRAZY!!! We never know about it until it's too late! That's the day after we install it!

McAfee Update Chokes Off Lotus Notes - Security, Antivirus - CRN

Did you know that the letter "T" is the most common letter in the English language? Followed (in some order) by E, R, F and G. And as it would happen, all of those letters are reaches typed with the index finger of the left hand. Which I slammed in a bathroom door yesterday. The door wasn't at home, it was a public building. I was coming out, not going in. Someone spoke to me...just then the spring kicked in and I couldn't get my finger out of the way fast enough.

So if I blog less for the next couple of days, you'll understand I hope.

My wife is trying to figure out how to catch my lips in a door somewhere...

Kidding, honey. Just kidding. (She probably doesn't read the blog anyway)

SPAM. SPAM. SPAM. A recent study in InformationWeek said that 94% of all email in December was SPAM.

I'm deleting about 30-40 comments from the blogsite a day that are SPAM.

Hi! Nice site with attractive design.

Nice guestbook.

Filled with links to places and things I didn't even want to know existed. And this morning, there were 165 junk (SPAM) trackbacks on the blog. (These are fake links from other blogs to this blog).

I'm tired of it.

How can we stop it?

Maybe we should try caning.

We're trying to recover the second set of data lost by businesses within a week. In one case, there was a hardware related failure, then human error that erased the data. There was a backup but it hadn't been checked and--as fate would have it--it was blank.

In the second case, human error erased the data. They picked us out of the phone book when they realized the data was gone. They told us they didn't have a backup.

Please take the time to check your backups. You need to check to make sure:

• You are backing up all the information you need to back up.
• Your backup is running.
• You can restore data from the backup.

A backup is like a fire extinguisher. You never know you need it until you need to use it. And then if it doesn't work, it's too late.

Digg is a news site where users vote on news items to move them to the top of listings.

This week, a small number of very prolific users posted a 32 character key that unlocks the encryption on HD DVDs and Blu-Ray DVDs, allowing them to be "ripped" to a computer and, theoretically, shared. Digg initially blocked (ok, I'll give here and use the "c" word: censored) the post. The users revolted. Digg gave in. The DMCA sued. Will Digg (a free service) survive?

PC Magazine summarized the basic situation in the following paragraphs from a post on its Costa Living site:

Although Digg built its entire business around user-generated content, you have no legal right to Digg anything.

Free speech is great, but remember that being free to say something doesn't mean you aren't responsible for it. Even without prior restraint, individuals, magazines, and companies are still open to libel, slander, and, of course, violations of intellectual property. Say what you want, but you can be held accountable for it. And this is, after all, a code that can be used to facilitate large-scale movie copying.

As a private company, doesn't Digg have the right to pub/unpub what it wants on its site? It already restricts posts that have links to porn and hate speech, so the precedent is there. If the company doesn't want to abet copyright violation, whether it is for fear of a lawsuit or a simple philosophical preference, doesn't it have a right not to?

I believe in free speech. I think it's a crock that if I buy Spiderman 2 and want to put it on my iPod video (which I still haven't bought), I'm breaking not only the encryption but possibly the law to do it. I'm not sure if Digg ought to be legally liable. But morally, I think the rules for video should be the same as the rules for audio. If I buy a CD, I can rip it (make it digital) and put it on my iPod. It's not legal, but I can also put it on a friend's iPod.

If I buy a DVD, I think I should be able to do the same thing. The DMCA will just have to trust me to do the right thing.

Here is another article about Digg's publication of the 32 digit key that allows decrypting of the HD and BluRay DVD standard. Digg is pretty cool...would hate to see legal claims shut it down.

Has Digg Dug a Legal Hole for Itself?

Open source violates Microsoft patents, so Microsoft claims. Patents, I guess, that Microsoft basically "borrowed" from Xerox PARC--who didn't have the foresite to patent the GUI or the mouse--years ago, or blinding flashes of the obvious that Microsoft rushed a patent filing into the patent office on.

I guess it's bad that I make my living working mostly with Microsoft products yet I still am a bit testy when Microsoft brings out the legal guns--or the threat of legal guns. It's not that Microsoft makes bad products--as a matter of fact, I wouldn't be writing this and you wouldn't be reading it if it weren't for Microsoft products. Microsoft products also integrate in a unique way. I'm not sure--for example--that there's another product in the market with the number of necessary features that Outlook and Exchange have when paired. And that's to write nothing of the integration between these products and the development tools Microsoft has. The object models for addressing the various Microsoft products are quite helpful in writing code to do a variety of things. Not that other companies don't have much the same thing.

But the thing that chaps me is that so many software companies have started to compete on the basis of how much cash they have to buy up competitors and how much slush fund they have to pay attorneys. Now Microsoft says, "we'd rather license than litigate." Nice alliteration there, but truth is borne out in action, methinks.

And now the open source community fires back that it has patents on technologies that are in Microsoft products.

Let the lawsuits fly! Mutually assured destruction.

It reminds me of the old move "War Games" where a kid accidentally hacks the US military's war computer and starts the game "GlobalThermoNuclearWar." It's a lot of fun until he realizes that (a) the guys in the green suits with scambled egg on their sleeves and bars on their chests don't know it's not real, (b) there may as a result be a real ThermoNuclear war, and (c) the computer can't be stopped.

Ultimately the world is saved by setting the big computer to playing tic-tac-toe against itself. It's a deadlock game, of course. Neither player can win if both play optimally.

The computer comes to a profound realization about both tic-tac-toe and Nuclear war: "What a strange game...the only way to win is not to play."

Show the movie in the boardroom guys. And get back to the business of competing on who makes the best mouse trap and markets it best. Leave the legal system for the guys in ChinaTown selling DVDs of movies not yet released on DVD for $5 each.

Microsoft Claims Open-Source Technology Violates 235 of Its Patents

One of the first articles I wrote for the Memphis Business Journal was about protecting kids from porn. In the current print issue of InformationWeek (which I just read), there's an article about a substitute teacher that has been convicted of risk of injury to a minor.
She claims, of course, that the porn just appeared. She did nothing wrong.

And if you've ever used a computer that's been infected with a virus or spamware, you believe her. Your computer takes on a life of its own. Windows appear and disappear.

The bigger issue here (article below) is that the market for spamming blogs (like this one) must be pretty good. I spend a few minutes every day clearing the link-backs and comments from people who want to sell drugs that make me feel good or enhance body parts I don't have (and a few that I do have), or make me more attractive to potential mates (I've been married happily 19 years), or take me to porn sites that have a variety of offered wares from teenagers to transgender folk to men and women of various ages.

And if I miss one of these comments (I rarely let anything pass until I've reviewed it thoroughly), you might find a link to something you don't want to see.

Watch what you click, and take a look at the InformationWeek article below.
Experts Warn Links To Child Porn Hidden In Legit Web Sites -- Security -- InformationWeek

A video taken from a law firm's seminar on hiring H-1b workers clearly has set off a firestorm. In the video, the firm touts a number of loopholes to help firms prefer immigrant workers to US workers. The posting has received thousands of views, and been picked up by several news outlets. See the eWeek article for more information.

In the coming election, watch to see if the "user generated content" websites like digg, YouTube, blogs, etc., have an effect. They will surely have an effect on PR.

Law Firm's Video a 'Blatant Disregard for American Workers'

I know that Windows Vista has been out for a while, and this post isn't really about Vista. It's more about what the lawsuit (see link below) over "Vista Capable" and "Vista Ready" stickers really implies. I think--realistically--that most people who read the documentation on what "Vista Capable" meant will know that this sticker meant basically NOTHING. The vendor (and Microsoft) basically said that if you purchased a PC with the configuration of the machine you were looking at, you'd have enough machine to at least run Vista. And, if you read the article, the end user did get Vista to run. She just didn't get all the various bells and whistles that were available for Vista.

Now realistically, if' you'd been following the system requirements for Vista, you had a pretty good idea that you needed a machine that was substantially more powerful than your good old XP machine to have a good chance at the more advanced features of Vista. But how does the average consumer know that? That's what the lawsuit is about. Turns out the Dianne Kelley bought a system that wouldn't give her all the bells and whistles that she needed to get the most from Vista. And she sued. Outcome? Of course, not yet.

But here's the lesson: software vendors often bury the real information you need to make an informed decision deep in the fine print. It's hard to make a good decision with the information you have (at least until you own the product) because it's almost impossible (unless you've been through it before) to evaluate your needs and the software requirements. The general feeling seems to be (I'm not accusing anyone here, let alone trying to single out Microsoft--all software vendors are equally guilty): "Get the end user involved, then they'll buy what they need to get really good performance out of the system."

And, having said that, I should also say that there are times when the problem is the end user's expectation. That is, there are unreasonable demands and expectations from the user. But let me ask you this: who set the user expectations? I've been in too many presentations when questions were asked or statements were made that--to be generous--stretched the capabilities of the software. The vendor hedged, or remained silent.

"This software will revolutionize my business! I won't have to do anything!" says the business person.

Software vendor: silence.

But here's the truth: what's reasonable is reasonable. What seems easy to do often isn't. There ain't no such thing as a free lunch. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Just don't tell any of the software companies I work with that I said that. I'll deny it.

Windows Vista Capable Lawsuit Continues

An article showed up yesterday in eWeek that claims end users have verified that Windows is updating end user systems without notification, even if Microsoft Update is set to notify before installing updates. Methinks this is a bad thing. Particularly given the fact that sometimes those updates break other things. Security updates that shut down custom software. Plugged holes that prevent internal support personnel from getting into the systems remotely, or cause printers to stop printing.

All in all, we want control over our property. And my PC belongs to my company, not to Microsoft!!!

Maybe that's the confusion: Microsoft thinks it owns the world!!

There'll be more backlash from this one for Microsoft.

Microsoft Watch - Operating Systems - Windows Update's Sneaky Updates

Twenty years ago when I started in this business, SCO Unix was around. It was a complex little operating system that not many folk used in business. There were, of course, exceptions. For the businesses that found software that ran on Unix, it was a good deal. Dumb terminals at a few hundred dollars rather than PCs at a few thousand.

And for all it's complexity and the steepness of its learning curve, it wasn't bad software. When Linux began to gain popularity, it was easy to prophecy the downfall of Unix, and many did. Novell's purchase of SUSE Linux seemed to seal the deal, but Microsoft's investment in SCO produced a lawsuit against Novell that seemed to be the battle of two insignificant market forces. The SCO lawsuit distracted Novell, and occupied time.

Now it appears that SCO is losing the lawsuit. Perhaps SCO still has a few tricks up its increasingly tattered sleeves, but not many more. We'll see.

For now, this looks like the last stand of an industry icon.

SCO Files For Chapter 11 Bankruptcy Protection -- The SCO Group -- InformationWeek

I've written a lot about my Linux experience, and I'll write more. But here's an eWeek article that provides 7 reasons that you'll probably continue to run Windows on your desktop computer. Must say, I think this is pretty spot-on.

7 Reasons Why Linux Won't Succeed On The Desktop -- InformationWeek

That scraping sound you hear is the sound of my soapbox being dragged out of the corner.

Ask the head of the OSI (Open Source Initiative) whether Open Source is the best way to unlock the value of IT (Information Technology), and what answer do you expect? Right.

How about an opinion from someone who really wants to use open source? From someone who's technically inclined? From someone who has an organization that specializes in implementing technology for clients?

How about my opinion, for example?

Here goes: open source is definitely coming of age. In the next few years (0.5 to 3 or so), I expect that you'll see a number of businesses move toward open source. In today's world, say "open source," and the product that comes to everyone's lips is "Linux." So the experience you have with Linux may tend to rub off on everything else that's open source.

And here goes: I've installed the Debian and Ubuntu versions of Red Hat on several machines (and virtual machines). The installation goes fine. The operating system comes up. I can use email, web browser, and the Open Office suite (word processor, spreadsheet, presentation graphics, etc.). As long as I'm working with what comes in the box, I'm Ok.

Now I need to use a wireless adapter to connect to my home network on Debian. Debian doesn't come with a compatible adapter. Begin an endless circle of trying to find websites with the correct (and up-to-date) information about how to re-compile the kernel or build a self-contained and self-loading package with wireless support. I'm sure I could have figured it out, but
after 2-3 hours invested in it, I'm not sure it's worth it.

So I load Ubuntu. It comes up and recognizes my wireless adapter. Problem: I have WEP ennabled, and the wireless adapter driver in Ubuntu doesn't seem to like it. Begin another endless search on the Internet.

So one of the guys here gives me a copy of Fedora...

Linux isn't the only open source software. Because it's an operating system and has to interface directly with the hardware, it's probably not even a good example to use or to compare others to, but it illustrates the issue with open source.

Here's the reality: once open source goes mainstream--really, truly mainstream as in millions of desktops--problems like this will go away. Someone will pay somebody like me to figure out how to make it work, or to write software to make it work, and then it will be contributed to the public domain.

As for now, in order to avoid the issues I'm having with Linux, I'll pay for my operating system.
Is Open Source the Best way to Unlock the Value of IT?

This has nothing to do with the general topic of the blog, but it's funny. You may have seen those "America's Dumbest Criminal" shows. How about this one? Steal a printer, then call the manufacturer for drivers to make it work.

What a laugh!!

After Theft, Tech Support Call Lands Man in Jail - CIO.com - Business Technology Leadership

Since my wife and I spent a lot of time looking for a Guitar Hero III for the Wii, I understand the effort this dad went to. I didn't know that I could get $9K for it on eBay. If I had, I'd have sold my son's, but not for the same reason. You'll have to read the article to find the real reason dad sold Guitar Hero...Dad sells son's 90-dollar video game online for more than 9000 - Yahoo! News

You can cancel the flowers, I'm still here.

I think I must have the same tendancy that I've observed in many of our clients. That is, I tend to get focused on one or two things at a time, and forget about the myriad small things that need to be done on a regular basis.

Like writing a blog entry or two.

The next few blog posts will (hopefully) catch me up on the research I've been doing for the last month or so.

Next post: observations on ERP Implementation. Coming tomorrow to a blog near you.

What? I got an email the other day from a new Microsoft Local Engagement Partner Manager, whatever that is. Links in the email he sent connected me to a website where I saw several "widgets" (which look a lot like blog rolls) to put on my site. If I fill in some info, it provides me with some code which I can paste in the blog. Clicking one of these things takes you to the Microsoft site. Here's the one on the current economy:

Ok, so I admit I do understand how this benefits Microsoft, since it links more traffic to their site. But explain to me again how this benefits MY business??

Hey, Microsoft, I thought the idea here was that we were partners. I'm trying to hold up my end of the bargain. What gives?

Folks, the IRS doesn't send tax notices in email!

Notice of unreported income email scam (PHOTO)

Gee, how do you figure the IRS justifies it? Actually intending to enforce a rule and a deadline.

Folks have been using offshore (Swiss) accounts to hide money for years. Never mind the questions on the tax return, "Does this entity own interest in a foreign bank account?"

Earlier in the year, after getting the Swiss firm UBS to agree to release a number of names, the IRS decided to play nice. They gave folk with illegal bank accounts until October 15 to self report and avoid a host of possible penalties.

Now they actually intend to enforce the deadline! Imagine that!

I'm having real trouble feeling sorry for anyone caught in this.

http://www.journalofaccountancy.com/Web/20092159.htm

You know, as a consultant who has to talk with clients about specific products, there's something that really hacks me off: discontinued products. Intuit had a product for QuickBooks called Business Analytics that was based on the BI suite from Business Objects (same folks that make Crystal Reports). It was pretty neat, not that I thought that the QBES target market would embrace the concept of BI, but it was a nice product (particularly for free). Discontinued. Nada. Good bye.

And now Microsoft discontinues the Microsoft Mobile for Dynamics offering. After certifying folks. After partners invested thousands of dollars getting up to speed. After some clients (you would assume) bought the product.

It hacks me off.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=4085

I've been asking businesspeople I know this question lately. I seem to be getting a lot of blank stares. Too bad.

See, I thought computers were just tools. They did things that businesses needed doing. So it's sad to me that many businesses don't think about their computer software (and computer systems, for that matter) as business tools.

We live (still) in a break / fix world. Where even managed services and outsourced service providers tout their ability to prevent problems. "We keep clients from having to worry about maintaining their own systems." "We provide the technical experts." "We do the backups." etc.

No one that I'm hearing says, "We improve client businesses."

That's what Data Guidance Group was started to do. That's what we do every day.

Haven't gotten a good suggestion lately? Contact me.

I like Seth Godin. I devoured his early books, and applied his concepts. This post is not about Seth Godin, even though the link below is a link to Seth's blog.

This entry is about the practice of posting "shortened" links to Twitter, LinkedIn, etc.

I regularly read these posts. In fact, I've learned something from many of them. It's a good way to see what others I respect value in the news.

Some of my "friends" and some people I "follow" seem more intent on making sure I see their post every day, so they post links to articles by other people. It's a game, see. Will he click or won't he? Will he waste his time on a generic link, or won't he?

Here's my advice: if you're going to post a link, make it relevant to what you do. Don't post a link to Seth Godin if you're in the Social Media marketing business, or the SEO business UNLESS Seth says something relevant to that business.

Better yet, post some (brief, well written, words-spelled-correctly) comment that tells me why the Seth Godin post is important. Anything else doesn't tell me anything about your expertise at all. It mostly tells me that you read a few websites and blogs. I do too!

By the way, here's a post from Godin that is along the lines, "The only people who do not fail are those who do nothing." Seth writes more, but that's the essential essence. Read it if you want to. It has nothing to do with my business, which is defined by a simple question, "When was the last time your computer software company gave you a suggestion that improved your business?"

Seth's Blog: Fear of bad ideas

Mrs. Crawford said that everyone has their favorite pet peeves about the English language; if you break these rules, they'll zap you.

She was right.

Your == belonging to you NOT the contraction YOU ARE.

So "That's your luggage" is right.
"Your not supposed to do that" is WRONG.

Bugs the crud out of me.

To[o] bad! Maybe I'm getting to be an old fuddy-duddy!

I sent a simple email to a customer service rep the other day. Here's a link you should look at, I said. It was a link to a site of a company using a logo (their logo). They had just told me they didn't give permission to use (I asked before using it).

Was I asking, "Then why is this site using it?" Yes, partially. Was I questioning whether I had the right answer, or just the convenient one? Yes, partially.

The answer I got back? "We are not giving permission to use our logo now." Right. I understood that. Did you read my email?

Obviously not.

My uncle John S. Palmer (deceased) introduced me to Mr. Rhea when I was still a Junior in college. He told Herbert that I was a computer guy. We met at Uncle John's house, in his home office. Herbert sat in one side chair, I in the other. He looked at me for a minute.

"What's the best kind of computer?" Mr. Rhea asked.

I was scared to death. In those days, there were Apple computers (Mac came out later), IBM PCs, System/34/36, UniSys, etc. I had heard that people got pretty testy about the brand of computer you liked. So I sat there and thought for a minute.

"That depends," I said, "on what you are trying to do."

Mr. Rhea looked at me. I would say he raised an eyebrow, but I'm no longer sure.

"That," he said--obviously referring to my answer, "That is the only right answer."

I went to work for Rhea & Ivy. Herbert Rhea and Jack Ivy were long gone by then, but the firm was still one of the most reputable in Memphis.

After five years, I moved along; Rhea & Ivy is no more. Many of the people I knew and respected are no longer there. But the legacy lives on.

Go to your rest, Herbert Rhea. Memphis is impoverished by your passing.

http://www.commercialappeal.com/news/2010/jan/05/clients-valued-rheas-insights/?print=1

InformationWeek has been touting the newest "Revolution" in the CIO job.

I read the GlobalCIO editorial in the December 21, 2009 issue of InformationWeek with a sense of shock. It was not the new developments that shocked me; these were little surprise at all. The shock was the word “revolution.” The implication is that the CIO has suddenly been given a seat at the boardroom table where none was vacant before. If the CIO did not have a chair at the table before, it was because the CIO had nothing of value to say to the board.

The technology industry has often promoted projects and products in a manner like drug companies advertise. ED drugs such as the “blue pill” promote themselves as an enhancement (upgrade) to an already adequate system. The original technology solved a very real problem. The advertisement creates a sense of dissatisfaction or concern and thereby, a sale.

The 70% or 80% of budgets that are spent on keeping the lights on and the hard drives spinning may fall into this category.

In another advertising paradigm, the symptoms of Peripheral Artery Disease are used as bait on a line cast broadly in hope of finding a patient whom the medication fits. Broad pain definitions attempt to “catch” a prospect that has similar symptoms; in many cases they do.

Microsoft divides its marketing into TDM (Technical Decision Maker) and BDM (Business Decision Maker) appeals. An examination of the details of these appeals would reveal that the TDM follows the first advertising approach, while the BDM follows the latter. In each case, the better plan for the patient (business) would be to seek and receive a holistic examination by a professional.

CIOs and professionals in general are in a position to understand both business and information technology. They should not expect or insist that the businesses that employ or engage them know or even initially want the treatment that is most appropriate. It is—and has been—the professional responsibility of the CIO to maintain a toolbox that contains both tools of business diagnosis and technological solution.

If this is revolutionary, then the revolution should be dated not to 2010, but to 1979. That is the year John Rockart’s article Chief Executives Define Their Own Data Needs appeared in the Harvard Business Review. Rockart demonstrates that executives often do not implicitly know what tools are appropriate to their tasks.

This is even truer today than in 1979. Part of the IT toolbox must be a tool for determining how to align the IT portfolio with a business strategy that technology both supports and directs. Just as it is unwise to specify the IT portfolio wholly from the business strategy direction, it is unwise to specify strategy without taking IT capacity and developments into account.

Though the technology of 1979 is vastly different from today’s technology, Rockart’s method for business analysis and understanding continues to enjoy application and success. There are other methodologies for this same purpose, but Rockart’s article can certainly serve as a milestone in the development of the modern CIO’s toolbox.

If CIOs do not have or develop such a toolbox, I fear that the “revolution” which most certainly needs to happen, whatever we call it and however it is dated, will fizzle before it takes hold. And the CIOs place at the boardroom table will most certainly be filled by another, as in that case it should be.