http://www.johnarch.net/blog/ en-us johnarch.ma@gmail.com Copyright 2007 2007-02-11T12:22:32-05:00 hourly 1 2000-01-01T12:00+00:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0013.html Plugins are a blessing and a curse for developers Boston JAVA Meetup Group, a sociable group of programmers who meet for lectures about and discussions of the JAVA programming language. Recently, while discussing Eclipse, several of us began to lament the performance (and diagnostic) issues that can arise from having too many plugins. One group member said he has gone so far as to have three or four instances of Eclipse installed, so as to assist with the diagnosis of plugin-related performance issues.

I left that meetup thinking about the problems I've noticed while developing for Firefox; a plugin I had installed was inhibiting the proper display of PDF files within the browser, and I only have about four plugins. I've grown accustomed to the fact that any Firefox-specific bugs I encounter may be plugin-related, but then I have to determine which plugin is creating the problem. This is complicated even more by issues that arise from software updates.

What can be done to make dealing with plugin issues easier?

It seems tedious to sift through developer forums for the answers to such problems. Should I really need to invest that much time? When I look at the Firefox Ad-On Page, I see very little that can help me. Is there anything to be found on the Eclipse site? I see nothing. Plugin-related problems are likely to grow exponentially as plugin usage becomes more prevalent, so a more practical solution needs to be arrived at to enhance the open-source experience.

Perhaps a first step would be to develop some sort of web database tool to assist with tracking known issues that arise due to plugin incompatibilities - a place where users can search for entries by plugin name. But it would be really great if someone created a diagnostic tool that could examine what plugins are installed for a particular program, and then alert the user to known or potential performance issues. Ideally, it would be best to find out about potential problems the moment a user begins to install a plugin.

Maybe we'll have a plugin to diagnose plugins ;)

I have confidence that the open-source community will respond to this emerging issue appropriately. More than likely, a team will be formed, consisting of developers who have been motivated by their own bad experiences. Hopefully, this will happen soon - doing so will only accelerate the adoption of the open-source philosophy. ]]> Digital Technology 2008-07-23T12:40:34-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0012.html CBS as benefactor to the less-than-famous article about music producer Rick Rubin that I keep thinking about. Rubin - whose fame and unorthodox managerial style have brought attention to his tenure as co-head of Columbia Records - is attempting to guide Columbia through the turbulence that is changing how the music industry operates. Ultimately, most of the challenges that Rubin faces are about the decentralized and asynchronous ways in which we now consume information (including art) on the Internet - ways that are creating the phenomena of microCelebrity.

CBS and other organizations like it lost their hold on culture when the public's need to use television, radio and newspapers disappeared. As a result, not only are these organizations making less money, but the "star" system that has been so central to their business model has become outdated. Honestly, could Beatlemania ever happen again? How about Walter Cronkite as America's newsman? These cultural events only became as "big" as they were because of the lack of asynchronous communication. Even with YouTube allowing for art and culture to be asynchronously consumed by the whole world, it could never duplicate the emotional significance associated with watching the Beatles live on the Ed Sullivan show at the same time as tens of millions of other people.

So where do things go from here?

Right now we're in a time of do-it-yourself microCelebrity: people are using basic tools to become famous on the Internet amongst a very small following of people, all the while being completely unknown to the rest of the world. Occasionally someone has mass appeal (see RocketBoom), but such appeal is difficult to maintain as cultural change now happens at an even faster pace than before.

Rubin seems to be exploring the idea of CBS as corporate benefactor to the digital/entrepreneurial artist, and he's right to do so. If Columbia simply provides seed money, a network of connected individuals, and resources - all on a modest scale - most new artists will be enterprising enough to take care of the rest. It is no different than the days when artists were sponsored by wealthy benefactors. Just as William Butler Yeats had Lady Gregory, so musicians can have Columbia Records, only the artist won't be quite so famous.

My belief is that eventually - probably within five years - an enterprising artist will find a way to make first class art that is consumed via the Internet and is also profitable. With a new business model, Columbia Records can be right there to cash in on the artist's microCelebrity. ]]> Digital Technology 2008-04-24T12:40:34-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0011.html Programming will be like reading or writing latest book on the death of IT has inspired me to do so.

I often feel that we are moving into a future where sophisticated programming will be an essential skill for everyone, almost as much as being able to read and write. Today we have teenagers hacking their mySpace page; tomorrow they will build fairly elaborate databases with web front ends, and, as time goes on, even more elaborate projects will be undertaken. One of the basic epistemological assumptions of the One Laptop per Child project is that children will learn how to program by first playing around with ("hacking") their own code, then freely sharing what they've learned amongst their peers. In twenty years, I see pretty much everyone being able to create fairly sophisticated programs beyond the capability of all but today's most expert coders.

I (sort of) think Carr agrees with my hypothesis, at least if by "IT" he means "data center." He does write about how "individual employees will be able to control the processing of information directly..." and this will happen. There will be so many tools freely available to assist with the creation of databases, security controls, etc., that there's no reason why an individual can't manage bytes and bits on his/her own. You need to know where your bits are - mine are located on a machine in Utah, managed by the folks at bluehost.com - but as long as you know the location of your bits in Carr's information cloud, you will be able to do whatever you want with them.

I see data as a sea of bits - having the ability to safely sail across it allows one to harness its awesome power to one's advantage; an entire generation of humans is about to set sail... ]]> Digital Technology 2008-01-08T12:40:34-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0010.html An Airline with a PC-TV interface
I'm starting to think that any interface with a hybrid TV-PC machine would look a lot like it.

The controller, which was stowed away in the armrest of my seat, was a little bit smaller than a standard TV remote. On one side it had the standard setup for changing channels, etc, but on the flip side it had a querty keyboard (with Blackberry-sized keys) as well as some buttons for navigating menus in lieu of a mouse.

The sides of this half-inch thick remote had buttons for usage in gaming; they were easy to manipulate, as the device had rounded sides.

Overall I think this remote has the right idea, but a few changes are needed for the shape; it's way too long to be practical for texting, and would be a bit cumbersome for gaming. Perhaps a shorter, more oval-shaped device like this would be an improvement? ]]> Digital Technology 2007-09-08T00:15:15-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0009.html With the Stiletto, SIRIUS has something serious to offer Stiletto.

The first thing I noticed was the familiar "click wheel" navigation device that Apple pioneered, making the Stiletto easy to navigate. I was unfamiliar with the SIRIUS business model, so I asked about it and was told that aside from being able to listen to an extensive array of radio stations, a user can save songs heard on the SIRIUS network to their Stiletto - a great idea for those times when you are out of wifi/satellite range, like on a subway train. You can also load music files from your own collection onto the device. So essentially, a SIRIUS subscriber gets a portable music player for $250 and an unlimited amount of music for $13 per month. Compare this to an 80 GB iPod that costs $350, plus the cost of buying and downloading music.

For the first time, I think I've seen a device that can challenge the iPod/iTunes model. The question is: what will Steve Jobs do about it?

As a user, I would definitely prefer to keep my iPod; as a piece of hardware, it's a better device. But as a music fan, I've lost the splendid spontaneity of discovering new music via the radio, and I want it back. I could be tempted to make the switch to SIRIUS for just this reason.

Right now, Apple has nothing to worry about; SIRIUS would need a huge influx of subscribers to chop into Apple's lead. But this could happen, unless Apple can proactively do something about it.

To this observer, the challenge is similar to what Apple faced in the 80's when it dominated the home computer market. Back then, Apple wouldn't modify its business model - they refused to let their products work with products from other companies, and eventually, it cost them everything. I'd love to see Steve Jobs create an iPod that does all the same things as the Stiletto, and the easiest way to do this would be through cooperation with SIRIUS. But what are the odds he would ever do this? If he tries to compete directly against SIRIUS, will he succeed?

I hope he's learned his lesson. ]]> Digital Technology 2007-07-27T00:15:15-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0008.html When semantic search arrives, will Google still dominate?
Google is contstantly refining its search engine, and I have no doubt that they are working on ways to incorporate the semantic web into future versions of their search algorithms. But with the exact manner in which the semantic web takes shape yet to be determined, it would be really easy for a small start-up to create an innovative tool that knocks Google off its perch. It would be the same as Achilles getting killed by an arrow that strikes his heel, and it could easily happen - after all, Google was once that company. Can they maintain their edge?

It is my opinion that Google will be the leader in semantic search, primarily because of the creative freedom given to their employees. It is this freedom, paired with the totality of Google's intellectual capital, that gives them the abilitiy to develop the best new products and find innovative solutions to problems. All this happens in spite of the fact that Google is so much larger and more burrecratic than it once was - something which ordinarily might inhibit such innovations.

Still, the undefined nature of a semantic application's look and feel will give small David-like organizations the opportunity to knock off Google's Goliath. The only sure thing is that the leader in semantic search will make a lot of money in advertising - and probably become the next "big thing." ]]> Digital Technology 2007-06-07T00:15:15-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0007.html Will the use of Windows servers become more appealing? pro-Linux ads that spoof Apple's well-known "Mac versus Windows" marketing campaign. In one of the ads a young lady playing the role of Linux mentions that there are over 30 million Linux users, a number which is sure to grow significantly over the next decade, especially amongst average users.

What does a future where Linux becomes a major player in home computing look like?

I attended a lecture last year where it was noted that because the source code of Linux is so widely available, hackers have ample opportunity to develop new techniques for accessing a system's kernel. To me, it seems logical that an increase in the prevalence of Linux is only going to make the problem worse, at least for a while. All this is will be going on while Microsoft's code remains proprietary.

In today's world, Linux is mostly for servers. But in tomorrow's, should sysAdmins switch to Windows?

So many people, especially in the developing world, will know how to use Linux, and so many of them will be programmers capable of hacking into another computer; it seems inevitable that, barring more effective and systematic thwarting of hackers - especially better regulation of ISPs in places like Eastern Europe and Southeast Asia - it will become much, much more difficult to manage Linux servers. This alone will make Windows a more attractive alternative for sysAdmins.

Think about this - if we eventually live in a world where Linux is the OS of choice for most homes, why not rely on a proprietary, "obscure" OS for serving data? What hacker is going to spend his/her time trying to crack a system whose source isn't open?

A couple months ago I installed a trial version of Windows Server 03 on a machine where I work, and I can't say that it's awful. I'd prefer Linux, but this machine is plenty serviceable. And if using Windows means less hassle when it comes to security, I'd just assume bite the bullet.

By no means do I think this role reversal is certain, and I certainly would prefer that open source software become as safe as possible. But the possibilities are intriguing. ]]> Digital Technology 2007-04-13T05:15:15-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0006.html We need a remote control for a fused TV/PC machine.
Beyond this are computers that are actually designed to work with your television: Apple's iTV is an example that comes to mind, and the internet has gotten in on the act with youTubeish websites broadcasting video. As we move closer to a point where a television is also a computer with a giant monitor, a question arises: what will the user interface be?

Several months ago I read an article on wired.com in which the author got rid of his cable TV plan and tried to live entirely off of video content downloaded from the internet. As I read the story, I kept wondering why there isn't some sort of device that allows the user to seamlessly move back and forth between television and internet-based content, all while being able to sit comfortably on a sofa or in a reclining chair.

Just now I did a search on google for "remote control computer" and found a few devices that supposedly allow you to control your computer with an ordinary TV remote, but what is really needed is a way to seamlessly integrate the experiences of watching a TV and using a computer. Having a simple, elegant user interface will be the key to this; there needs to be a way to consume all this media while reclining in a chair and holding a drink in your hand. There needs to be a device that lets a user interact with this machine using only one hand, much like with an ordinary television.

I've been prognosticating about the eventual union of television and personal computers ever since a particular sixth grade science project, and the machines necessary to make this into reality are almost here. Now what is needed is the right type of interface for the viewing habits of the typical user. ]]> Digital Technology 2007-03-08T17:15:15-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0005.html Trying to use a Pocket PC as a translator is challenging.
Being the sort of traveler who likes to connect with the local culture, and knowing that I was going to be spending time in rural areas, I had, for the purpose of facilitating communication with non-English speakers, explored the possibility of downloading some sort of translation software to a handheld device. I envisioned using it to have robust, meaningful conversations with the people that I met, and I became excited about the prospect of doing something totally new.

One of my friends loaned me his unused HP iPaq Pocket PC, which has audio input and output. After hunting around for quite some time, I was disappointed to find no 'on the fly' translation software for handheld devices. Eventually I decided to demo a trial version of a French/Spanish/German/English translation software suite from LingvoSoft. This package, filled with predetermined phrases, purported to meet 80% of a traveler's needs, and would output an audio translation of the selected expression.

The trial version of LingvoSoft was very unimpressive. Many of the expressions that one could select seemed unusual; I didn't anticipate needing to know where the stadium was, or how to get to a marina. The audio output of the translations was of extremely poor quality, and did not take advantage of the iPaq's full aural range.

While sitting @ a cafe in Innsbruck, I met a San Franciscan named Dave, who makes a living in web services. We discussed my consternation with LingvoSoft; he relayed his own experience of downloading a German dictionary to his Palm device, only to have it offer up translations that were either arcane or incomprehensible. He found himself being told by German speakers "that's not how we would say it..."

What all of this taught me was that handheld translation clearly has a very, VERY long way to go before it reaches its potential. But when that does happen, cultural exchanges will be greatly enhanced. What if, in five to ten years, a person could speak into a Pocket PC, and have an instant audio translation of their words into another language? As I can personally attest based upon my experience while riding the sleeper car on a train from Zürich to Vienna, this could be a big help to travelers everywhere.

Too much was made of the old notion that digital technology would prevent meaningful human relationships. Everywhere I go, I see increasing evidence that the digital age is being melded in such a way as to enhance the lives of those that live in it. Hopefully, when I next visit Europe, handhelds will have come far enough that I can carry on a lengthy conversation with someone while using such a device as a translator; I would love to have a chance to put this to the test in a mountain hut in the Austrian Alps. It's even possible that a cell phone could be imbued with such capabilities (although that might be further off).

Every day, we're moving in the right direction ... ]]> Digital Technology 2006-08-18T12:22:32-05:00 http://www.johnarch.net/blog/entry0004.html Michael Nesmith's ideas about the future of music creation; introduction of new forums for music distribution
Just this month, the website lala.com was launched. It is a forum for the peer-to-peer sale of CDs at bargain prices - often for as little as one dollar. It provides a great way for users to try something new by buying inexpensive used CDs from artists whose product might normally be too pricey to merit purchase on a whim. Lala even sends the artists a (small) portion of the money derived from the sale.

The recording industry doesn't like this business model one bit, but it will be hard pressed to force Lala to change, as many of the piracy issues that dogged napster have been addressed. The only truly outstanding issue is the sufficient compensation of artists.

As the technologies that support music consumption evolve, the music industry has had to evolve in step. But the advances in online music distribution that have been made over the past several years are sure to doom the big-business entities like Sony, Warner Music, etc., that have dominated the industry. These advances not only allow consumers to get choice music for less, but enable musicians to directly market themselves to their audience through the internet, thereby eliminating the need for support from a large corporation. Inexpensive digital tools that aid in the creation of sophisticated music only further diminishes any barriers that aspiring musicians confront.

Michael Nesmith, formerly of the 60s group The Monkees and now a multimedia seer who is credited for the seminal work that lead to the creation of MTV, sees a future where music will not be bounded by any format, and where musicians can use the social networking aspects of Web 2.0 to gain exposure. The only limiting factor is digital technology itself.

The collective effect of all these forces means that every day, our world is slowly moving closer to an era of widespread, mass entrepreneurship - an era in which only the most innovative corporations will be able to survive. ]]> Digital Technology 2006-06-20T12:22:32-05:00