• You can't ignore a ringing phone

    It's funny when you look back a few years to see just how communications technology has changed - remember when you might have asked (or been asked), "are you on the phone?"... meaning not, "are you using the phone" but "do you have a phone at home"... now we just assume that (pretty much) everyone's got a mobile phone, everyone has internet access and everyone has at least one email account.

    Organisational culture has evolved a lot in the last 5-10 years, to the point where a lot of people hide behind email while some try to escalate into other forms of communication as soon as possible. There's one guy at Microsoft who always phones in response to getting an email from me. I tend to enjoy playing cat and mouse by letting the phone drop to voicemail, listening to the message, then emailing him back :)

    A lot of us have settled on corporate Instant Messaging as a happy medium, for a number of reasons:

    • Like email, it offers access to the whole corporate address book, not just the list of people I've talked to before (such as MSN/Live Messenger does) so I can IM people I've never had anything to do with.
    • Presence from Communicator is shown in Outlook 2007, and on Sharepoint web sites, so it's often easier to be context sensitive.If someone's presence shows up as "In a Call", there's no point in phoning them, cos they're already on the phone (and the status is set by the telephone system, so when they hang up, it'll revert back to Normal).
    • Best of all, it's neither as intrusive as a phone, but the immediacy doesn't get lost as easily as in email.
      • You can't really ignore a phone that's ringing - sure, you can forward to voicemail so it doesn't ring at all, but that's different.
        • A phone which forwards to voicemail is like the Schrodinger's Cat experiment in that you won't know whether you have voicemail - and hence whether anyone was ringing the phone at any given point - until you observe the light on the phone or you actually check your messages. So,
      • When the phone rings, you decide (usually based on the caller ID that's displayed) if you're going to answer it, combined with a load of environmental factors (are you busy? are you in a place where you don't want to take this call? are you just about to go to the toilet so don't want to be distracted right now? etc)
      • Email, for a lot of people, tends to be like a stack. The last message in (and the one at the top of the list) is the one that gets first attention, meaning it's easy to overlook stuff that's in the middle of the stack and probably off-screen when the Inbox is sorted.
    • If someone doesn't respond to an IM, you generally accept that maybe they didn't see it - because it's disposable communication, you don't tend to have the assumption that a reply is expected. If a sender doesn't get a response to something important, they'll always try again, or escalate to another form of communication (like phoning you up).
    • IM makes a great way of starting a side conversation with someone, which might turn into something more formal (escalating to email, to face:face, to group conversations on the phone or even online meetings through the likes of Live Meeting).
      • Often, I'll see someone's staus as "In a meeting" - now that could mean they're sitting at their desk but with Outlook blocking time out of their calendar to do some work (or maybe they're on a conference call). I'd typically say "busy? got a min?" and if no response comes back, I'd assume that yes, they are busy, and no, they don't have a min. If a response does come back, then maybe I'll realise they're not busy, they're not on the phone, and in fact, they'd like to meet up for a coffee in 5 minutes.

    Interestingly enough, John Westworth IM'ed me halfway through my writing this post to ask a question about my mobile device (an SPV M3100). He theorised that he doesn't answer his phone much (more through accident than desire, I should add), and figured that I might be the same... so it would be better to IM instead ...

    This led to an idea for some canny Windows Mobile developer to pick up, and make riches from - an AI-like Bozo Filter for the phone. Just think ... it could pick up the Caller ID from an incoming call, figure out if that user is in the Outlook contacts list (or maybe even the GAL) and cross reference with the number of times that individual appears in the Call History (ie have I called this guy before? Has he called me a lot and actually got through?) and in the mail client, then apply a Bozo Confidence Filter (BCL) to the call... which would then allow me to set up rules to decide my preferences for when I will accept calls and from what level of Bozo...

    Combine all this with the inherently linear nature of a phone call - it's synchronous, you (generally) can only have one at a time, and they tend to be fairly short. IM conversations can be done in parallel with each other (though make sure you don't type a comment into the wrong window by mistake...) and some may have many rounds of dialogue/response stretching over a reasonable period of time (usually at most a day). Email would suit much more asynchronous communications that might be shared with hundreds of people, stretched over any length of time. Choosing which one to use is increasingly a personal preference, and in future, the choice is increasingly going to be with the recipient rather than the sender. So, when the guy I mentioned earlier picks up the phone to call me and I don't answer, I might receive the call as an IM stream if I'm online and want to take it, rather than dumping straight to Voicemail...

    Exciting times, eh?

    //E

  • Vista Aero Glass - performance hit (or not)

    Just read an interesting analysis at http://firingsquad.com/hardware/windows_vista_aero_glass_performance/ where they tested a couple of different systems running Windows Vista with Aero Glass switched on and off. (Windows Aero - if you're not aware of it by name - is the new user interface functionality, with transparent windows and the swish new effects present all through Vista)

    The cynic in most techies would assume that flashy graphics mean hammering the system performance; I've known plenty of people who even switched off all the fancy UI features, on the basis that the machine would be a few % more responsive... remember the old advice on Windows 3.1 or 95 to not use a graphical desktop backdrop since that put an overhead on system performance?

    Anyway, the FiringSquad results are predictably games-focused, but draw an interesting conclusion - graphical performance is, in some cases, marginally better with Aero switched on, and even in the cases where it isn't, it's only fractionally less so.

    "Quite frankly, we were shocked by these results."

    So, the moral of the story is... switch on all the bells and whistles if you can :)

  • Some more useful Windows & Outlook shortcuts

    As I mentioned the other day, I've a penchant for using shortcuts in Windows: most (if not all) are documented in help files and the likes, but it is amazing how many people don't know about them or just don't use them.

    Continuing the list of shortcut keys that can save a few fractions of a second each time you use them...

    • ALT-SPACE brings up the menu which allows you to maximise, minimise etc the current window - may be useful if you've played with multiple monitors and a window appears half off the screen such that you can't get to the top of it... ALT-SPACE followed by "M" (for Move) will allow you to use the arrow keys to shift the window around the screen.
    • In Outlook, CTRL-2 switches to the Calendar, CTRL-3 to Contacts, and CTRL-1 back to Inbox. Handy if you're often flicking around to arrange a meeting with lots of people...
    • Still in Outlook, when viewing the Calendar ALT-= switches to Month view, ALT- "-" (next to equals sign) switches to the week view, and ALT- number displays the number of days forward from the current date (eg ALT-9 will show 9 day view).

    There are lots of handy commands which you can type, used in conjunction with Windows-Key-R, to speed navigation in the UI. You could even set up shortcuts to some of these for quick activation using the mouse/start menu etc...

    Some favourites:

    NCPA.CPL - jumps straight into the network control panel, rather than (depending on which version of Windows you're running), fiddling about in Control Panel and looking for Networking connections. Under Vista, the guts of Networking is hidden behind the Network & Sharing Center.

    DESK.CPL ,3 - (note the space before the comma) - takes you straight to the display settings page that's used to change resolution, select monitors etc.

    COMPMGMT.MSC - quick way of getting to the main Computer Management snapin, which branches off to event logs, user manager etc.

    SYSDM.CPL - System Properties dialog (same effect as pressing WND-BREAK)

    There are many more - from SERVICES.MSC or EVENTVWR typed directly at the Start menu, to MSTSC /v <server> /console to take over a remote machine's console using the Terminal Server client.

    Enjoy - and Happy New Year!

    //E

  • Choosing a new MP3 player - dilemmas, dilemmas...

    It's time for a new music player. I got a Creative Zen Micro a couple of years ago, and it's been a good little player but the headphone socket has now developed a loose connection and it's getting a bit annoying. It's time to start choosing a successor.

    Things I liked about the Zen Micro, which help to shape the criteria I'm using:

    • 5Gb is a decent amount of storage; I've got about 1200 tracks and 1% free space. I tend to put a few whole albums on it, and just sync playlists from Windows Media Player for the rest. That can sometimes be a bit frustrating, when I'd listen to one song in the playlist then think "oh, haven't heard him for a while", go to play the whole album, only to find that's the only song I've synced from that album... so maybe more space would be useful, but is it worth the tradeoff in battery life and physical size that might bring?
    • It's small enough. I certainly don't want anything smaller than the Zen, and although thinner would be cool, it's not a big deal - I guess I'm thinking I don't want to go for anything much bigger if I'm going to use the device a lot. It would be cool to have a nice big screen, but if it means the device doesn't live in my bag that I carry everywhere because it's too big, then it means I won't use it.
    • It's got a mini-USB plug on the bottom. Say no more - when I'm travelling or on holiday (which is when the device is getting more prolonged use), I have a single charger or sync cable for the music player as for the mobile phone. OK, you could argue that's the thin end of the inevitable convergence, but I've covered some of that ground already...
    • I don't use the radio much, but every year when we troop down to Le Mans to see the 24h race, it's really useful... so if I could get a new device with an occasional radio use, that'd be cool.

    All my music is in WMA format and I can't really be bothered with the idea of re-ripping it all or converting to MP3 (a process which would inevitably degrade the sound quality quite some), and I've bought some stuff from MSN Music so would like to be able to carry that forward.

    Point 1 (WMA) rules out anything in the iPod range (why won't Apple just get over it and put WMA support on the iPods??), and point 2 (DRM) rules out the Zune for the moment since (almost unbelieveably) it's not compatible with Plays4Sure.

    I suppose at some point I'll get a Zune: maybe even when I'm Seattle early next month... but for the moment, I'm leaning towards the Sandisk Sansa range... I did love their "iDont.com" viral advertising on the tube last year, and these devices seem to be getting decent write ups though there are some minor niggles (like no mini-USB, for example).

    Buying the right technology and not ending up with an expensive dud or a short-lived manufacturer's folly... it's not easy, is it?

    //Ewan

  • "Dealers of Lightning" - an insightful history in Xerox PARC

    Ever since reading  Robert X Cringley's excellent 1996 Accidental Empires book (which actually has the even more excellent full title of Accidental Empires: How the Boys of Silicon Valley Make Their Millions, Battle Foreign Competition and Still Can't Get a Date), I've been interested in some of the history behind the way the PC and internet industry has evolved. I've always loved Cringley's description of Steve Jobs as "The most dangerous man in Silicon Valley"... (in fact, he even opens Accidental Empires with a line akin to the opener from the sadly departed Douglas Adams' tome, Dirk Gently's Holistic Detective Agency, which was, "High on a rocky promontory sat an Electric Monk on a bored horse.")

    Many commentators would trace the genesis of a lot of technology we now take for granted back to Xerox Corp's famed Palo Alto Research Center, aka PARC. The roll call of what was supposedly invented at PARC is long - laser printers, ethernet, the bitmapped display, GUI, mouse, object-oriented programming, distributed computing... the list goes on.

    Legend goes a little fuzzy though - not everything that came out of PARC originated there, but a lot of the researchers who worked there in the glory days brought ideas with them and refined them enough to be useful (eg Doug Engelbart, who invented the mouse before coming to Xerox but perfected its use with the new bitmapped displays and Graphical User Interface). Legend also has it (backed up by some fact, in fact) that The Most Dangerous Man in Silicon Valley himself was given a guided tour of PARC's facilities, saw the Alto computer they'd invented (showcasing their GUI, mouse et al) and became inspired to have Apple launch the Lisa computer, which was the forerunner of the Mac.

    Anyway, a few years ago I picked up Dealers of Lightning - a potted history of what happened at PARC, and it really is a fascinating read. It can be a bit heavy going in places but gives a great insight not only into the amazing work they did at PARC (and the disdain the industry poured on Xerox Research for basically inventing the world as we know it but then alledgedly doing nothing with it, because they couldn't see how it related to selling photocopiers), and it also paints an inspiring portrait of the head of the Computer Science Lab, Bob Taylor.

    Taylor's basic philosophy was to hire people that were smarter than he was (and he was the guy who founded ARPANET, the precursor to the internet, so must be a bit of a smart cookie himself). He also decided, in the CSL, that he couldn't manage any more than 50 people directly, so he set the cap on that size of organisation (since he didn't want to introduce layers of management), and just went about making sure those 50 were the best he could possibly find. What an visionary management style, and an amazing story.

    It's also interesting to see how many of the luminaries mentioned in this book as the fathers of computing as we know it, now show up in the Microsoft Global Address List :-)

    //Ewan