May 12

There’s a delightful story that does the rounds regarding one of the founding fathers of Linux. It’s said that during the early days of the open-
source operating system’s development, this fellow took to attending conferences in complete silence. All attempts to communicate via means other than hand gestures were refused. Instead, he pointed at things.

Apocryphal or not, the tale remains highly relevant today. Our hero’s beef was with the windows-based graphical interface metaphor and its knack for turning us into mouse-pointing morons. Fast-forward a decade or two and astonishingly little has changed. The windows GUI has, you might say, proven to be extremely gluey.

The classic case study is Microsoft’s eponymous Windows OS. Admittedly, early versions of Windows would seem pretty alien to today’s users – but that’s an illusion. Look past the clunky graphics and Windows 95 is largely identical even to Windows 7, Redmond’s latest and greatest OS. Icons, taskbar, the folder metaphor – all are essentially the same as they were 15 years ago.

That’s a long time in any industry, but it’s an absolute eternity in information technology. Along the way, Microsoft has flirted with a few interesting new features. Early betas of Vista included widespread use of virtual folders and the promise of a fully vectorised and hence scalable graphical interface, for instance. But in the end, the retail build of Vista was yet another reskin of Windows NT, just a bit prettier.

Linux and Apple’s Macintosh operating systems have scarcely been any more innovative. More user-friendly and configurable? Perhaps. More polished? Certainly. But both remain firmly rooted in the window-juggling keyboard-and-mouse camp.

Compared to the enormous advances made in computer hardware, it’s all a bit bizarre. Back in 1995, a single-core Pentium processor running at 100MHz or so was your lot. That’s an in-order 3.1 million transistor chip with 8kB of cache memory, for goodness sake. Today, we’re up to six cores, multiple GHz, over a billion transistors and cache pools nigh on double-digits in MB.

If you think that’s merely a matter of scale rather than a new paradigm per se, what about features such as virtualisation or hardware-accelerated 3D graphics? That’s to say nothing of the rapid rise of LCD monitors and more recently solid-state drives. By any sane metric, computer hardware has been in a constant state of revolution. It’s utterly relentless.

So, not to put too fine a point on it, what gives with GUIs? The answer, frankly, is that I don’t know. Over the years, I’ve visited several labs dedicated to advanced interface research, including those of Microsoft and Intel. I’ve even interviewed luminaries from the heyday of interface research, including some who worked at the fabled Xerox PARC lab in Palo Alto. The very people who invented the GUI, in other words. In fact, I reckon I’ve spoken to all the right people. I’ve played with all the latest table-top, touchscreen human-machine interfaces. But I remain essentially clueless. Nothing I’ve seen or heard of is obviously the next big thing.

At this point, Apple’s iPad inevitably hovers into view. A remarkable device in many ways, it’s no good for data input or content creation and therefore doesn’t offer a plausible alternative for desktop computing. However, what it does is underline just how painful the Windows interface is. Once you’ve danced around a few of your favourite websites courtesy of the iPad’s delightfully responsive screen, the scrolly-scrolly, pointy-clicky PC experience seems pretty laughable.

Even a good smartphone can make the PC feel clumsy; I often prefer reading emails on mine. Replying to them is out of the question, but as a viewing device it’s very pleasant and provides temporary relief from what is becoming an overly familiar and oppressive desktop computing experience. You could say the differences are largely arbitrary, but trawling emails on my phone feels like a break from work. That’s got to say something about the tiredness of the windows metaphor.

Tags: API, Apple, Computer, Computing, cores, desktop, Development, device, email, Ghz, Hardware, information, Information Technology, interface, linux, Macintosh, memory, microsoft, Operating Systems, processor, Research, system, Technology, transistor, virtualisation, Vista, web, Windows, XP
Feb 24

Logo_small Update on 6/28 – I did a Thirsty Developer interview with Doc List, about Open Spaces and the unmeeting that we held.  Check out the Episode Page or Listen to the show.  I also made a minor change to the text below (moved one of the titles down a paragraph).

I think pretty much everyone has heard of the concept of the Open Spaces (or its close cousin the unconference) Open Spaces are:

A facilitated participant-driven face-to-face conference around a theme or purpose. (according to the unconference blog

Recently some of my teammates gathered together to talk about planning our direction for the next year (the Microsoft fiscal year runs from July to June).  We had a day together and a lot of items to cover, as you can imagine planning the direction for a large team for a full year will give you a lot to talk about. 

I got the task of putting together the agenda, which is a tough when you have limited time and lots of material.  Brian Prince, my friend and colleague from Ohio, put out the suggestion that we should try to apply the Open Spaces Technology to our planning meeting.  Our boss, Brian Moore, is always willing to let us try things that are unconventional (with a few caveats that I will mention later).  So eight of us set about having a meeting that used some of the Open Spaces principals or what I am dubbing an unmeeting.

Applying the Open Spaces Principles

unmeeting 002With open spaces, there are 4 principles that guide the event.  They are very Zen like, which is why you generally have a professional facilitator to help guide you through the application of the principles.  The principles are:

  1. Whoever comes is the right people
  2. Whatever happens is the only thing that could have
  3. Whenever it starts is the right time
  4. When it’s over, it’s over

I got to serve in the role of facilitator for our “unmeeting”.  We did a number of things to apply the Zen like principles.  Our plan was to have 6 attendees at the event, but we discovered that we needed more “right people” there.  So we recruited a couple more people (including one that we picked up at a happy hour the night before).

The majority of our agenda was driven by a combination voting / consensus process (we used post in notes on the whiteboard with tick marks).  We also modified the conversation throughout the day, which was important because there were a couple of topics that did not fit into nice hour long segments.  And of course was not problem with everyone knowing that the meeting was over, after a long day of planning, it was obvious it was over. 

In addition to the 4 principles of Open Spaces, there is one law…..

Another key difference between the unmeeting that we held and the traditional Open Spaces is that the “Law of two feet” was somewhat modified for our purposes.  The law of two feet can be summed up as:

If at any time during our time together you find yourself in any situation where you are neither learning nor contributing, use your two feet. Go to some other place where you may learn and contribute.

No voting with your feet at our unmeeting

The law of two feet is great when you have choices of the activities to participate in; many Open Spaces events will have multiple sessions going on at the same time.  If you are not getting something out of your current session, it is great to be able to leave without you or the other people feeling awkward.

unmeeting 006Our unmeeting did not have breakouts, so the only option was to leave the room for a while (which we encouraged if you needed a mental or physical break) or to lose focus on the proceedings by getting lost in your e-mail.  We tried to discourage non-topical use of your laptop during our proceedings (I as the facilitator used some creative techniques as you can see from the photo).  This was somewhat a violation of the law of two feet, but part of this was driven by our culture as a company. 

Most of you have probably never been to an internal Microsoft meeting (unless you work there).  The great majority of the meeting has the Microsoft folks all affixed to their laptop screens dealing with the avalanche of e-mail we get on a daily basis (we try to behave ourselves better when we are at a meeting with customers and partners).

The boss is still the boss

Brian Moore Attacks One of the things that was different about our unmeeting was that it was commissioned by our boss and he did have a specific set of outcomes that he needed to accomplish at the conclusion of the meeting.  As a result, he did dictate that we cover a few agenda items. 

If it was a true Open Spaces, the participants could have chosen to ignore topics that they did not want to cover, but this was an unmeeting.  We accommodated the “mandatory” sessions by putting them on a different colored sticky from the other topics during the voting/consensus process.  The participants still got to choose when in the agenda that we covered the mandatory sessions, but we had to work them into the day.  Other than that, our boss did not really rule the meeting with an iron fist (despite the picture).  He did serve in the role of the “expert” as we would have questions about the outcomes that we were trying to accomplish.

Overall I think we had a positive experience applying the Open Spaces Technology to an internal meeting.  I would encourage considering how you could apply the principles and law at your work.

Tags: application, blog, Ghz, iss, laptop, Learning, material, microsoft, space, system, Technology, XP
Nov 22

The new version of Fedora 12 is released. You can install famous communication software skype in fedora 12 using some simple steps.

  • Hardware requirements
  • 1 Ghz processor or faster.
  • 256 MB RAM.
  • 20 MB free disk space on your hard drive.
  • Microphone and speakers or headset.
  • Internet connection – broadband is best (GPRS is not supported for voice calls).
  • Video card driver with Xv support.
  • Software requirements
  • Qt 4.2.1+
  • D-Bus 1.0.0
  • libasound2 1.0.12
  • PulseAudio 0.9.10+ (optional)
  • PulseAudio 0.9.15+ (optional recommended)

Technical details
Version 2.1.0.47

Download Skype for fedora from here

Double Click and Install

Tags: blog, dba, Ghz, google, Hardware, Internet, linux, processor, requirement, Software, space