Divergent citation-indexing paths

As I mentioned the other day, it’d be useful to have audio-only versions of many of the Channel 9 videos for folks who (like me) have more time to listen away from the computer than to watch at the computer. Pretty soon that’ll start happening for new stuff. Then, of course, there’s the archive. One proposal was to sift out the most popular videos and convert them first. But what does “most popular” mean? It depends.

Pageviews and downloads are one way to measure, and of course the sites have those stats. Citations are another. I’m always interested to see how frequently things are being cited in blog postings and shared bookmark systems. The visualization I did here, which tracks citations of the ACLU Pizza fictional screencast as seen through the lenses of del.icio.us and Bloglines, is a nice example.

So I scooped up the video URLs mentioned in this RSS feed and ran the same sort of analysis. The Bloglines results were fine, but the del.icio.us results were wonky. Eventually I found the problem. Del.icio.us, unlike Bloglines, treats the URLs that you feed to its citation counter in a case-sensitive way. And there are multiple spellings of the “same” URL pattern on Channel 9, including:


Because del.icio.us citations attach to particular spellings, you’d need to query using each of them to get the whole story.

This case-sensitivity is one of the subtler forms of a much more general problem. Content management systems quite commonly provide different URLs for the same resource, and each of those is an invitation for citation indexing systems to wander down divergent paths.

For a long time I’ve thought that strong URL discipline was the best way to avoid this problem. But there are other approaches. In the academic world, where citations are taken very seriously, digital object identifiers play a much more important role than they do on the web. We web folk could learn a thing or two from our academic cousins, and that’s one reason why I’ll be interviewing Nature.com’s Tony Hammond for an upcoming podcast.

If you’re curious, by the way, here’s the data from Bloglines. I don’t have the del.icio.us data yet because I managed to get myself blocked from the server while futzing around — sorry Josh, I’ll query more slowly next time.

show title
158 169962 Otto Berkes – Origami’s Architect gives first look at Ultramobile PCs
134 151853 Robert Fripp – Behind the scenes at Windows Vista recording session
090 271984 Scott Guthrie – MIX07, Work, and Personal Details Revealed
057 270965 Windows Home Server
043 261254 Looking at XNA – Part Two
034 116347 Steve Ball – Learning about Audio in Windows Vista
029 116702 Paul Vick and Erik Meijer – Dynamic Programming in Visual Basic
028 019174 Andy Wilson – First look at MSR’s "touch light"
024 056393 Steve Swartz – Talking about SOA
016 069437 Office Communicator
010 268480 Special Holiday Episode IV: Don Box and Chris Anderson
010 256597 WCF Ships, Doug Purdy Dances, and Don Box Sings
009 252457 A Chat and Demo about LINQ with Wee Hyong (Singapore MVP SQL)
009 208891 What’s Microsoft Speech Server (Beta)?
008 039280 Herb Sutter – The future of Visual C++, Part I
008 010189 Anders Hejlsberg – What’s so great about generics?
006 273697 Anders Hejlsberg, Herb Sutter, Erik Meijer, Brian Beckman: Software Composability and the Future of Languages
006 272229 Ulrik Molgaard Honoré: Production planning with Dynamics AX
006 229585 Programming in the Age of Concurrency: The Accelerator Project
006 159231 Office 12 – Word to PDF File Translation
005 267098 The Best XNA Movie in the UNIVERSE
005 221610 Shankar Vaidyanathan – VC++ IDE: Past, Present and Future
004 274865 Scott Hanselman & Jeffrey Snover Discuss Windows PowerShell
004 009894 Building a Picture Frame with Windows CE 5.0 – Step 1
003 274069 Brad Abrams on AJAX for ISVs
003 266221 MultiPoint: What. How. Why.
003 248575 Software Security at Microsoft: ACE Team Tour, Part 2
003 246477 Exploring the new Domain-Specific Language (DSL) Tools with Stuart Kent
003 237142 VSTO 2005 Second Edition Beta: Martin Sawicki
003 029505 Gabriel Torok – Protecting .NET applications through obfuscation
002 271257 Adam Carter and Mike Adams on Managed Services
002 269462 Tara Roth: Not your father’s world of Software Test
002 265667 Revisiting WiMo – The Windows Mobile Robot
002 263358 Joe Stegman talks about the "WPF/E" CTP
002 013653 Jason Flaks – What is Windows Media Connect?
001 274644 Beam me over, Scotty: Introducing Transporter Suite
001 274641 Sharepoint Templates: What. How. Why.
001 273337 New Vista GUI Stuff For Devs
001 273061 Mike Barrett: Testing and Deploying IPV6
001 270453 Technology Roundtable #1
001 267604 UK Community: DeveloperDeveloper Day
001 263442 Expression – Part One: The Overview
001 232481 WPF Chart Control (from the perspective of summer interns)
000 273120 Ask The Experts! : Anders Hejlsberg
000 271378 Ask The Experts! : KD Hallman
000 264874 Rob Short: Operating System Evolution
000 263902 Windows 2000 to Windows Vista: Road to Compatibility
000 238608 Windows Vista: Ready for ReadyDrive

A screencast about common feeds in Vista

Today’s 4-minute screencast, which explores Vista’s common feed system, serves multiple purposes. First, I wanted to familiarize myself with this stuff, and do so in a way that would elicit responses that help me understand how other folks are reacting to it. I am intensely interested in the reasons why people do or don’t take to the notion of reading RSS feeds. Mostly, as we know, they haven’t.

The assumption is that surfacing the concepts more prominently in the OS will help, and I think that’s true, but there’s a lot going on here. For example, even just explaining to people how feeds are like-but-unlike email is a huge challenge. When you start from the perspective of reading feeds versus reading email, it’s hard to see the difference. One key distinction — that feeds are by-invitation-only and can be easily and effectively shut down, versus email which is uninvited and can be very hard to deflect — is fairly abstract and hasn’t sunk in yet for most people.

When you start from the perspective of writing feeds versus writing email, the differences, and the benefits that flow from those differences, are even more compelling — at least to me. But the reasons why are even more abstract: manufactured serendipity, maximization of scope, awareness networking. How might Vista, or any desktop operating system, help surface these concepts?

I also made this screencast to find out what it’s like to make screencasts of Vista. I haven’t yet installed Camtasia on my newly-acquired Vaio laptop, because I want to repave that machine with a final version of Vista that I don’t have yet. But no worries, there’s always good old Windows Media Encoder. I’ve always said it’s an underappreciated jewel, and evidently that’s still true as it is not inclulded in Vista.

After capturing with Windows Media Encoder I transferred the file to my XP box for editing in Camtasia. As always, the process reminded me of Pascal’s famous quote: “If I had time, I would write a shorter letter.” Boiling a screencast down to its essence is really hard. One of the biggest challenges is meshing the video footage with the audio narration. I want to produce a series of screencasts that illustrate this process, but I’m not sure how best to separate out the kinds of general principles I outlined here from details of specific applications and delivery formats.

A couple of final points about the RSS features shown in the screencast. It shows how to acquire feeds one at a time into the common pool using IE, and how to acquire batches of feeds into Outlook by importing an OPML file, but there’s no obvious way to load a batch from OPML into the common pool. I know I could write that app, but is there one lying around somewhere that I’ve missed? Also, how do you batch-delete feeds from Outlook once you’ve acquired them via OPML?

Matthew Levine’s holy grail

Yesterday I noticed that my new home page was a disaster in IE7. I’d cribbed a CSS-based three-column layout from Google’s Page Creator. Then, as is my custom, I’d pruned away as much of the complexity as I could. But evidently I pruned too much of, or the wrong parts of, the the CSS gymnastics encoded in that example. So I wrecked the layout for Internet Explorer.

As per comments here, standards support in IE7 is a thorny issue and discussions of it are heavily polarized. But I aim to be (cue Jon Stewart) a uniter not a divider. So here I simply want to give props to this article by Matthew Levine, from A List Apart. From it, I cribbed the wrapper-free Holy Grail. It’s a minimalistic CSS-based three-column layout that seems to work well in every browser I’ve tried: IE6, IE7, Firefox, Safari.

To be honest, although I’m hugely fond of CSS styling, I’ve always struggled with CSS layouts, and I know I’m not the only one in that boat. When you read the explanation in Matthew’s article, you can see why. CSS layout is like one of those games where you slide 15 tiles around in a 16-square matrix. In principle it is a declarative language, but in practice the techniques are highly procedural: Step 1, Step 2, etc.

Whether that’s good or bad, and to what extent CSS layout really does trump table-based layout — these are interesting questions but separate discussions. The bottom line here is that I wanted to do a CSS-based layout, I wanted it to be as minimal as possible so I’d have the best shot at understanding and maintaining it, and I wanted it to behave reasonably in a variety of browsers. For that I needed the pattern, or recipe, which Matthew’s article helpfully provided.

It’s appropriate that he calls the technique the Holy Grail because the three-column layout applies very broadly. Yet, though there are tips and tricks all around the web, I’m not aware of a well-known cookbook, or pattern library, that:

  • Identifies the handful of most popular layouts.
  • Illustrates minimal, bare-bones CSS treatments.
  • Certifies those treatments for cross-browser use.

For extra credit, this cookbook could filter the recipes according to whether support in each of the major browsers is must have or nice to have or optional.

Cross-browser issues have always been a headache, they still are, and the reality is that dealing with them requires hacks. The more we consolidate and simplify the hacks, a la Matthew Levine’s holy grail, the better.

First have a great use experience, then have a great user experience

For a couple of years I’ve been trying to transfer my experience of listening to podcasts to my dad. There’s so much interesting stuff to listen to, and he has both the time and the interest to listen, so in theory it’s a perfect fit. But in practice, though he’s heard a few of the talks I’ve forwarded to him as links, I haven’t managed to create the “aha” moment for him. This past week, though, may have been the tipping point. He’d landed in the hospital and I was determined to give him an alternative to the in-room TV. So I loaded up my old 256MB Creative MuVo with a selection of favorite talks, bought him a pair of headphones, gave him the kit, and showed him how to turn it on and press play.

It’s been a huge success. The next challenge, of course, will be to show him how to refill the gadget once he’s listened to the dozen or so hours of stuff I gave him. But I hope I’ve won the important battle. Time will tell, and I could be wrong, but my hunch is that what remains — a conversation about feeds, podcatchers, and USB cables — will be a mop-up operation.

In the tech industry, though, I think we often pretend that the mop-up operation is the battle. We talk obsessively about the user experience, and we recognize that we invariably fail to make it as crisp and coherent as it should be. But user experience is an overloaded term. I propose that we unpack it into (at least) two separate concepts. One is the basis of the “aha” moment. For now I’ll call it the use experience. In this example, it’s the experience of listening to spoken-word podcasts from sources that, just a few years ago, weren’t available.

I’ll reserve the term user experience for something else: the tax we pay in order to enjoy the use experience. This tax is not the basis of an “aha” moment. It’s expressed in terms of the devices, cables, batteries, applications, menus, dialog boxes, and — last but not least — the concepts we must grapple with in order to reliably reproduce the use experience. A great user experience makes all this crap relatively less awkward, confusing, and annoying. A lousy user experience makes it relatively more so. But the point is that it’s all crap! It’s the tax we pay to enjoy the use experience, and we want to pay as little of it as we can get away with.

How do you engineer a great use experience, as opposed to a great user experience? Part of the answer is deep personalization. So while the talks I loaded onto that MuVo for my dad included some of my favorites from ITConversations, the Long Now Foundation, TED, and elsewhere, I also included some my own podcasts. And that’s what tipped it for my dad. He’s proud of the work I do, but most of it has always been inaccessible to him. So I picked a handful of my most general-interest podcasts on education, government, and health care. And that worked really well. Every time I visited last weekend, he was listening to one of mine. But when I talked to him mid-week he was listening to the Burt Rutan TED talk that I’d hoped he would enjoy.

This is a personal story, but I’m certain the principles apply more broadly. On the Microsoft campus this past week, for example, I got together with Mike Champion for coffee and a chat. Among other things we talked about Channel 9 which he rarely tunes into, although it features a variety of things that would interest him. We also discussed the fact that, while there are spaces in his life into which he might enjoyably and profitably inject podcast listening — long bike rides, for example — he hasn’t yet done so.

Right after our chat I walked into my first team meeting with the Channel 9 and 10 folks and recalled a point I’d made a while ago, which is that video isn’t the medium of choice for Mike’s bike ride. He knows what Anders Hejlsberg and Jim Gray look like. He doesn’t have time in front of a computer (or a handheld video player) to watch them talk. But he does have time on his bike to listen to them talk. Everybody in the meeting agreed that peeling off sound tracks from the videos and making them available as podcasts is a no-brainer, so it looks like that’ll happen. Thanks in advance, Adam, for agreeing to make it happen, and please don’t take this as arm-twisting. I know you’re busy and will get to this when you can. I’m telling this story to make a larger point which I think may provoke some useful discussion.

The larger point is that all of us, me included, tend to focus on engineering the user experience and tend to forget about engineering the use experience. A better user experience, in this case, is partly about making audio files available, and partly about organizing podcast feeds so that I could subscribe to everything that comes down the pipe featuring Anders Hejlsberg or Jim Gray or other folks I want to tune in.

Those tweaks will probably lower the activation threshold enough for Mike to hop over it. But I’m not certain of that. There are still obstacles to overcome. What will motivate Mike to overcome them? An “aha” moment, a good use experience. So how do you engineer that?

I like Mike, but not enough to give him a preloaded MP3 player. I could, however, make him a mix of some Channel 9 stuff. And as I did for my dad, I’d want to include some of the other stuff that I’m always recommending to people.

How exactly to do that is an interesting question. As a hip Internet citizen and podcast aficionado I’ll be inclined to find a podcast remixing service, use it to make Mike’s mix, then point him to the feed it emits. But I actually think that would be the wrong approach. If I point him to a podcast feed, I force him to grapple with the podcatching user experience. But I don’t want to clobber him right away with a user experience. First I want to give him a satisfying use experience.

Different requirements dictate different engineering solutions. If I’m trying to engineer a delightful use experience it might be best to hand him a ZIP file of MP3s. I know he’ll know what to do with that, using any kind of MP3 player, without having to deal with any new tools or concepts.

Now of course Mike, being a typically super-smart and super-technical Microsoft employee, is perfectly able to deal with new tools and concepts. That’s what he does for a living, after all, and he does it because he likes to.

But in this context, I think that’s a red herring. Just because Mike can power through the crap doesn’t mean that he should have to, at least not right away, at least not if it can be avoided. The less to distract him from that “aha” moment, the better.

There’s probably a whole literature on this topic, and the terminological distinction I’m trying to make here may have been made differently and better elsewhere, in which case I’ll appreciate pointers to that literature. Terminology aside, I think the distinction is important in lots of ways. In terms of Channels 9 and 10, for example, it suggests the following:

1. As do video stores, Channels 9 and 10 could offer staff picks.

2. The picks could be made available not only as feeds, but also as bundles.

3. The picks could mix store-brand stuff from 9 and 10 with related stuff from elsewhere.

4. Viewers and listeners who follow 9/10 (and other sources) could use remix services hosted at 9/10 (or elsewhere) to share their own picks as feeds (or bundles).

But I think this principle applies much more broadly. Recently, for example, I mentioned my positive reaction to the $8/month commodity hosting offered by BlueHost.com. Ironically, BlueHosts’s founder recently blogged about how Microsoft doesn’t — and he thinks, can’t — play in that market. Could that change? If so, how? I can’t answer those questions at the moment, but I can say that good answers would lead with use experiences and follow with user experiences.

When you provision an instance of a MySQL database at BlueHost, you have a much better user experience than you have when you provision one from the command line, but to be honest it’s not a great user experience. Lots more could be done to clarify the concepts of databases, users, passwords, rights, and so on. Still, relative to the command-line alternative, you can much more quickly and more easily have the experience of deploying a world-accessible database-backed application. When you have that kind of use experience, you become an adopter of the enabling technology. It’s that powerful.

A conversation with Avi Bryant and Andrew Catton about Dabble DB

Last week’s Friday podcast ran afoul of travel craziness but the series continues this week with a further exploration of Dabble DB, the through-the-web database that was also featured in a screencast. In my conversation with Avi Bryant and Andrew Catton we explore some of the underpinnings of Dabble, including the remarkable fact that it’s written in the Squeak implementation of Smalltalk.

I’ve underplayed that point until now, because I’m trying to broaden the appeal of what I do, but it turns out that Dabble DB is a great example of how dynamic languages can produce effects that people see, interact with, and care very much about. Programmers aren’t the only ones to benefit from direct manipulation of objects, continuous refinement, and always-live data. We all need things to work that way, so it’s cool to see how the dynamic qualities of Dabble’s Smalltalk engine bubble up into the application.

Rewriting the web with MSIE

In response to my item on media hacking the other day, this comment alerted me to a really sweet bookmarklet that adds a slider to a Flash movie. You don’t get timecodes but you do get start/pause/scrub which is a tremendous benefit.

When I tried it out, on both Firefox and IE, I was reminded again about the relative inaccessibility of bookmarklets in recent versions of IE. In Firefox it’s a drag-and-drop to the linkbar, and even that procedure eludes most people. In IE it’s a much more complicated dance which I illustrated in my Bookmarklets 101 screencast.

Because I now aim to improve digital literacy as broadly as I can, I’ll be focusing more than I have in the past on the browser that most people still use, which is IE. Here I’d like to toss out a couple of points for discussion and follow-up.

Bookmarklet policies.

It’s understandable that bookmarklets, which are JavaScript snippets that run in the context of web pages, would be locked down in a browser that’s busily rehabilitating its security reputation. But typically they’re not really locked down, just inconveniently accessible. Suppose you want to encourage your people to use these kinds of productivity aids. What does the domain policy look like for doing that?

Greasemonkey for IE.

What’s the deal nowadays? At one time I heard about Trixie but not so much lately. I’ll revisit it myself, but I’m curious to hear reports on Trixie’s compatibility with Greasemonkey userscripts, its rate of adoption, and its security model.

Thursday night switcheroo

The original plan to meet up at the Crossroads Mall on Thursday night turned out to conflict with what sounds like a popular and fun event: the Seattle podcasting network get-together. So I’ll be there instead, and if anyone wants to go out for drinks later, I’ll be up for that. Dennis Hamilton, who originally proposed the Crossroads Mall, has kindly volunteered to drop by there and see if anybody who does happen to show up wants to go over to the podcast meeting instead.