I had a play with the trial edition of Webcentral's Promotions Manager as a substitute for our current cranky and unreliable newsletter system.
Very quickly I hit the limits of the trial; specifically the limit of ten recipients per email.
That's a plain stupid limit. You cannot test a bulk emailing program with a limit of ten users. It's like taking a car for a test drive but being unable to take it out of the driveway. Sending ten emails is very different to sending five thousand.
WebCentral and other vendors need to understand that crippleware like this is a waste of time. If you aren't going to let the customer trial the full product in real circumstances, then you may as well not bother.
As it stands this trial version is useless. It's simply not worth bothering with. It's a classic example of bean-counting managers not understanding their market.
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Sunday, January 27, 2008
Frustrated with DMOZ
The Open Source Directory project is a great idea, but it needs more transparency.
DMOZ is a free, not for profit version of Yahoo! and Alta Vista. Inclusion in it helps a web site's rating on web searches. It's considered important to getting high listings on your website.
The problem with DMOZ is the process of adding a site seems to be arbitrary and totally opaque; submitters have no idea if the site has been reviewed or declined. All you can do is wait and see if your site appears in the directory.
Today I submitted the PC Rescue site for the twelfth time in ten years by my count (it may actually be more). Not once have I succeeded.
I've tried different categories in case I've chosen the wrong section and different wordings in case the editors thought my descriptions were inadequate. The response has always been the same; nothing.
Lest I be accused of spamming DMOZ, the submissions have been months, if not years apart.
Yet strangely, IT Queries appeared of it's own accord. All I can assume is a DMOZ editor
stumbled on it and thought it was suitable for inclusion.
I have a lot of sympathy for the DMOZ volunteers. Their workload must be huge and the backlogs in some categories must be horrible.
But I think DMOZ can improve things by more being transparent. Giving a little bit of feedback on whether the site has been evaluated and the reasons if rejected would make the job easier for everybody. It would also defuse a lot of the criticisms DMOZ receives.
As I said at the beginning I'm at a loss to see how to get PC Rescue into DMOZ. So from last month, I've decided to resubmit my application every six weeks. Perhaps this might eventually get some response.
My apologies to the hard working editors if I'm making the work load worse, but I don't see any other way of dealing with it.
DMOZ is a free, not for profit version of Yahoo! and Alta Vista. Inclusion in it helps a web site's rating on web searches. It's considered important to getting high listings on your website.
The problem with DMOZ is the process of adding a site seems to be arbitrary and totally opaque; submitters have no idea if the site has been reviewed or declined. All you can do is wait and see if your site appears in the directory.
Today I submitted the PC Rescue site for the twelfth time in ten years by my count (it may actually be more). Not once have I succeeded.
I've tried different categories in case I've chosen the wrong section and different wordings in case the editors thought my descriptions were inadequate. The response has always been the same; nothing.
Lest I be accused of spamming DMOZ, the submissions have been months, if not years apart.
Yet strangely, IT Queries appeared of it's own accord. All I can assume is a DMOZ editor
stumbled on it and thought it was suitable for inclusion.
I have a lot of sympathy for the DMOZ volunteers. Their workload must be huge and the backlogs in some categories must be horrible.
But I think DMOZ can improve things by more being transparent. Giving a little bit of feedback on whether the site has been evaluated and the reasons if rejected would make the job easier for everybody. It would also defuse a lot of the criticisms DMOZ receives.
As I said at the beginning I'm at a loss to see how to get PC Rescue into DMOZ. So from last month, I've decided to resubmit my application every six weeks. Perhaps this might eventually get some response.
My apologies to the hard working editors if I'm making the work load worse, but I don't see any other way of dealing with it.
Friday, January 25, 2008
Which is BS? Productivity or John Dvorak
On ZDNet John Dvorak tells us productivity gains are BS.
John's point seems to be that fact the receptionist is filing her nails it means her productivity can't be improved.
Doris on reception or Bruce in Accounts may only do four hours productive work a day, the idea is we make those four hours more productive.
Today's office is far more productive than the office of twenty years ago; computers, broadband Internet, colour printers and mobile phones mean today's office worker can do in ten minutes that would have taken weeks in even the biggest corporation.
I love it when people tell us the days of the abacus, slide rule or carbon paper were easier. My advice to them is to try it.
John's point seems to be that fact the receptionist is filing her nails it means her productivity can't be improved.
Doris on reception or Bruce in Accounts may only do four hours productive work a day, the idea is we make those four hours more productive.
Today's office is far more productive than the office of twenty years ago; computers, broadband Internet, colour printers and mobile phones mean today's office worker can do in ten minutes that would have taken weeks in even the biggest corporation.
I love it when people tell us the days of the abacus, slide rule or carbon paper were easier. My advice to them is to try it.
Lack of innovation
Are many of the problems too many product ranges, a lack of innovation or too much reliance on planned obsolescence?
An article in Baseline Magazine caught my eye this week about GMs decline and suggesting that Apple is going the same way.
Basing Apple's decline on reports that Microsoft's poorly named and badly executed Zune has outsold the iPod is a bit flakey in my view. But there are some good points in this argument about innovation and it's role in keeping businesses and economies vibrant and growing.
While I agree Apple's strategy with rolling out too many versions of the iPod is confusing , even I have trouble keeping track of what iPod does what, and perhaps Apple's motives are a bit cynical, Apple are actually the poster child for innovation.
The real battle here isn't innovation; it's about quality. Apple and Toyota are perceived as putting out higher quality products than GM and Microsoft.
Because customers believe the quality is better, they are prepared to pay more for it.
Innovation is essential to keep ahead of the pack, particularly in markets like consumer electronics and motor vehicles where's a bunch of low cost commodity manufacturers are constantly snapping at your ankles, but it's quality that is essential to grabbing the high margin customers.
In the case of GM, I'd argue they've failed on counts; in Microsoft's case many innovations haven't added much value and their quality, particularly in the last two versions of Windows, has been dire.
An article in Baseline Magazine caught my eye this week about GMs decline and suggesting that Apple is going the same way.
Basing Apple's decline on reports that Microsoft's poorly named and badly executed Zune has outsold the iPod is a bit flakey in my view. But there are some good points in this argument about innovation and it's role in keeping businesses and economies vibrant and growing.
While I agree Apple's strategy with rolling out too many versions of the iPod is confusing , even I have trouble keeping track of what iPod does what, and perhaps Apple's motives are a bit cynical, Apple are actually the poster child for innovation.
The real battle here isn't innovation; it's about quality. Apple and Toyota are perceived as putting out higher quality products than GM and Microsoft.
Because customers believe the quality is better, they are prepared to pay more for it.
Innovation is essential to keep ahead of the pack, particularly in markets like consumer electronics and motor vehicles where's a bunch of low cost commodity manufacturers are constantly snapping at your ankles, but it's quality that is essential to grabbing the high margin customers.
In the case of GM, I'd argue they've failed on counts; in Microsoft's case many innovations haven't added much value and their quality, particularly in the last two versions of Windows, has been dire.
Thursday, January 17, 2008
Mac shipments up
Well, it looks like my eyes didn't deceive me; Mac sales are up. It's barely surprising, given how badly Microsoft have dropped the ball with Vista and just how badly PC retailers are bodging the sales process up.
How long can the Freesphere survive?
Following up my post on the curse of the free, Alex Isgold of the Read Write Web blog raises similar concerns.
Alex's points are quite right and I agree with most of them, where I disagree is that teens are to blame for this; this is a far deeper, more entrenched mentality that goes back to the roots of the PC and the homebrew hobbyists.
The comments in reply to Alex's post are instructive for the mentality they reveal, the bulk of comments are on the side that all is free and all is good. These show the how deep this belief is.
One comment that sprung out to me though was Hank Williams' comment about this actually being an intellectual property issue. While I think it's bigger than this, he has a very good point that people are ignoring or just have contempt for intellectual property.
Personally I think the IP system is broken and in disrepute. This is largely the fault of the incompetence of the US Patents Office and large corporations abusing legal process. It's part of the picture, but not the whole story.
Regardless of what is the cause, the fact is everybody needs to paid for at least some of their work and that is ultimately why the Freesphere cannot survive.
Alex's points are quite right and I agree with most of them, where I disagree is that teens are to blame for this; this is a far deeper, more entrenched mentality that goes back to the roots of the PC and the homebrew hobbyists.
The comments in reply to Alex's post are instructive for the mentality they reveal, the bulk of comments are on the side that all is free and all is good. These show the how deep this belief is.
One comment that sprung out to me though was Hank Williams' comment about this actually being an intellectual property issue. While I think it's bigger than this, he has a very good point that people are ignoring or just have contempt for intellectual property.
Personally I think the IP system is broken and in disrepute. This is largely the fault of the incompetence of the US Patents Office and large corporations abusing legal process. It's part of the picture, but not the whole story.
Regardless of what is the cause, the fact is everybody needs to paid for at least some of their work and that is ultimately why the Freesphere cannot survive.
Sunday, January 13, 2008
The top of Web 2.0
If we needed any evidence of the dot com 2 boom being at it's top it's this article in the New York Times.
It's not that plenty of fish's founder, Markus Frind, is making a killing with the web site, I admire him and wish the best.
What I think indicates we're at the top of the market is the fact his advertisers are paying affiliate commissions of 100%. That is just plain silly and clearly unsustainable.
Markus' business model illustrates the point of my curse of the free post a while back; Plenty of Fish is popular because it is free and is profitable because it gets free labour. If Markus had to pay the 120 volunteers who vet photos for the site, that 10 million suddenly looks pretty ordinary.
Anyway, the real gains for people like Markus haven't been in the turnover of the business, it's been in selling the business to big operators. I wonder if that business model too may be coming to the end given the recession talk we are now hearing.
It's not that plenty of fish's founder, Markus Frind, is making a killing with the web site, I admire him and wish the best.
What I think indicates we're at the top of the market is the fact his advertisers are paying affiliate commissions of 100%. That is just plain silly and clearly unsustainable.
Markus' business model illustrates the point of my curse of the free post a while back; Plenty of Fish is popular because it is free and is profitable because it gets free labour. If Markus had to pay the 120 volunteers who vet photos for the site, that 10 million suddenly looks pretty ordinary.
Anyway, the real gains for people like Markus haven't been in the turnover of the business, it's been in selling the business to big operators. I wonder if that business model too may be coming to the end given the recession talk we are now hearing.
Friday, January 11, 2008
trusting people
I've read a few of Bruce Schneier's articles in the past and I'll certainly defer to him on specific matters of security.
However I have to disagree with his steal this wi-fi article.
Quite simply, Bruce is wrong on not securing his wireless network. He alludes to it himself,
I know people who rarely lock their front door, who drive in the rain (and, while using a cellphone) and who talk to strangers.
His first point sums up the problem. In an ideal world we could leave our doors open and trust our neighbours and passers by.
Sadly, in today's modern world you can't always trust your neighbours and passers by. Just as some of them will steal your DVD and laptop, some of them do want use your Internet connection for bad deeds.
One of the main reasons why hackers and criminals spend so much time developing malware is so they can steal bandwidth and spoof IP addresses. Being able to use someone else's connection is incredibly useful to the bad guys.
Leaving your wireless network open only makes the job easier. In fact, it probably encourages people without the skills or work ethics of the serious hackers.
The part of Bruce's article distresses me the most though, is his comment about being prosecuted for something done from an Internet connection as being "far fetched".
Bruce lives in the same land as Julie Amero. Her case alone proves in US that the combination of an incompetent cop, a gung-ho prosecutor, a lazy judge, a clueless defense attorney and jury of morons is more than enough to get someone convicted of serious crimes.
But the risk of prosecution isn't the problem, an investigation alone is a costly, stressful exercise. Just being investigated for child porn or cybercrime offenses may be enough to destroy marriages and careers.
Having your computers confiscated for weeks as investigation goes on would cost people like Bruce and myself a lot of money.
Bruce's opinion in Beyond Fear, that security is actually a series of trade offs, is quite right. In this case though I think Bruce has the trade off wrong; the convenience of being able to access free Wi-Fi does not justify the substantial risk of bad guys piggy backing on your Internet connection.
The moral is quite clear. Protect your wireless network.
However I have to disagree with his steal this wi-fi article.
Quite simply, Bruce is wrong on not securing his wireless network. He alludes to it himself,
I know people who rarely lock their front door, who drive in the rain (and, while using a cellphone) and who talk to strangers.
His first point sums up the problem. In an ideal world we could leave our doors open and trust our neighbours and passers by.
Sadly, in today's modern world you can't always trust your neighbours and passers by. Just as some of them will steal your DVD and laptop, some of them do want use your Internet connection for bad deeds.
One of the main reasons why hackers and criminals spend so much time developing malware is so they can steal bandwidth and spoof IP addresses. Being able to use someone else's connection is incredibly useful to the bad guys.
Leaving your wireless network open only makes the job easier. In fact, it probably encourages people without the skills or work ethics of the serious hackers.
The part of Bruce's article distresses me the most though, is his comment about being prosecuted for something done from an Internet connection as being "far fetched".
Bruce lives in the same land as Julie Amero. Her case alone proves in US that the combination of an incompetent cop, a gung-ho prosecutor, a lazy judge, a clueless defense attorney and jury of morons is more than enough to get someone convicted of serious crimes.
But the risk of prosecution isn't the problem, an investigation alone is a costly, stressful exercise. Just being investigated for child porn or cybercrime offenses may be enough to destroy marriages and careers.
Having your computers confiscated for weeks as investigation goes on would cost people like Bruce and myself a lot of money.
Bruce's opinion in Beyond Fear, that security is actually a series of trade offs, is quite right. In this case though I think Bruce has the trade off wrong; the convenience of being able to access free Wi-Fi does not justify the substantial risk of bad guys piggy backing on your Internet connection.
The moral is quite clear. Protect your wireless network.
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
Weathering the storm
The talk of the United States going into recession really focuses the mind on how this is going to affect the IT industry.
Greg Linden in his Geeking with Greg blog has a very good take on some of the effects on the industry. I particularly like his view that the 2001 dot com crash was part of the reason for the spyware explosion.
Personally though, I think Greg is understating the effects of a full blown recession. I suspect the VCs are going to find their cash reserves largely aren't there and the "Google dollars" that have funded much of the dot com 2.0 splurge will either be greatly devalued or turn out to be ephemeral.
As we've found in previous downturns, when homes and businesses fall on hard times the first thing that gets cut is IT spending. It doesn't matter if we're talking about household luxuries like iPods or business necessities; it all gets cut.
This means problems for everyone in the industry.
For the smaller computer tech, there's two big effects; first your customers stop spending money and, second, thousands of new businesses start up as unemployed programmers, web designers and even carpenters who "know something about computers" setup their own tech support businesses.
This puts the local support guy in a squeeze his income's cut as customers stop buying or calling, customers become more price concious and the competition is going to get much, much more intense.
A storm is coming and all small business owners need to be trimming their sails, but proprietors of IT related businesses really need to be reviewing their costs and operations and looking at just what they currently have stashed away.
Greg Linden in his Geeking with Greg blog has a very good take on some of the effects on the industry. I particularly like his view that the 2001 dot com crash was part of the reason for the spyware explosion.
Personally though, I think Greg is understating the effects of a full blown recession. I suspect the VCs are going to find their cash reserves largely aren't there and the "Google dollars" that have funded much of the dot com 2.0 splurge will either be greatly devalued or turn out to be ephemeral.
As we've found in previous downturns, when homes and businesses fall on hard times the first thing that gets cut is IT spending. It doesn't matter if we're talking about household luxuries like iPods or business necessities; it all gets cut.
This means problems for everyone in the industry.
For the smaller computer tech, there's two big effects; first your customers stop spending money and, second, thousands of new businesses start up as unemployed programmers, web designers and even carpenters who "know something about computers" setup their own tech support businesses.
This puts the local support guy in a squeeze his income's cut as customers stop buying or calling, customers become more price concious and the competition is going to get much, much more intense.
A storm is coming and all small business owners need to be trimming their sails, but proprietors of IT related businesses really need to be reviewing their costs and operations and looking at just what they currently have stashed away.
Friday, January 04, 2008
The curse of the free
One of the toughest problems for IT businesses is the fact computer users, both consumers and small businesses, expect many products and services for free. This makes it difficult for anyone trying to make a living in the IT industry.
A recent question on our IT Queries site is a good example. A lady asked what free programs she can use to remove popups.
You can see the problem here. The customer asks a free advice site for a free program to fix the problems caused by her grandkids looking for free music.
Now I'm not criticising this lady, she's just doing what millions of computer and Internet users do every day.
Of course, this is nothing new, even Bill Gates found himself dealing with this thirty years ago.
Nick Carr wrote in the Guardian a few days back about the Internet increasing inequity and hollowing out the middle classes. I'm not sure this is the case, I suspect it's the free mentality that makes it harder for the smaller operators and contractors make a living.
For the moment, the big boys prosper and some of that money trickles down to those they take over. But I'd suggest the big boy's business models are just as unsustainable as the little guy. What's kept these businesses going were surging stock markets, forgiving investors and cheap money.
Now the party in the stock and money markets is over it will be interesting to see how this pans out for the industry. My guess is some of the bigger players will suffer just as much as the little guys have.
In the long term the free mentality has to change; because there's no way IT workers can earn a living if customers expect everything for free.
A recent question on our IT Queries site is a good example. A lady asked what free programs she can use to remove popups.
You can see the problem here. The customer asks a free advice site for a free program to fix the problems caused by her grandkids looking for free music.
Now I'm not criticising this lady, she's just doing what millions of computer and Internet users do every day.
Of course, this is nothing new, even Bill Gates found himself dealing with this thirty years ago.
Nick Carr wrote in the Guardian a few days back about the Internet increasing inequity and hollowing out the middle classes. I'm not sure this is the case, I suspect it's the free mentality that makes it harder for the smaller operators and contractors make a living.
For the moment, the big boys prosper and some of that money trickles down to those they take over. But I'd suggest the big boy's business models are just as unsustainable as the little guy. What's kept these businesses going were surging stock markets, forgiving investors and cheap money.
Now the party in the stock and money markets is over it will be interesting to see how this pans out for the industry. My guess is some of the bigger players will suffer just as much as the little guys have.
In the long term the free mentality has to change; because there's no way IT workers can earn a living if customers expect everything for free.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)