Here is a business opportunity for those young, smart, savvy folks who want to make a name for themselves - and who have substantial software development capability.
It's in the document creation and management space that is occupied by Microsoft Word - but first you must read my previous post.
Ask me questions if you aren't clear about my wants and needs.
So the opportunity is to create a standalone "Microsoft Word document processor" that reads Word documents - and easily and interactively allows the removal of all the BS formatting there which has accumulated over time - all without changing the "look and feel* of the "final" word document.
Essentially, I want a tool that removes all the crap formatting, optimises the document and builds and applies the best possible styles to the remainder.
This is a specialised application - that helps mitigate against *dumb* users and Bill Gates' money making machine.
Can you do it? Are you up for it? If you are and can demonstrate that you are capable - then I will license your software and make you "rich and powerful".
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Word - everyone is an expert
Microsoft Word is Bill Gates' revenge on the nerds and anyone who won't RTFM.
I work in the tech industry and just about everyone who thinks they are a guru has major difficulty with Microsoft Word.
Why? Well they think that because they know some completely irrelevant application or programming language or deep technical *thing* that they are automatically qualified as an *expert* on all things software.
And so they start typing into Word and it accepts their input - and the next thing you know they have created an unholy mess and don't even know it.
What's worse is when they send it to 20 other people and that mess grows like topsy. It becomes a virus that 20 others have a go at to *add their value*.
The interesting thing about the tech business is that much of the day-to-day effort is spent on meetings, developing proposals, writing reports, managing projects and interacting with people. Like many industries, this requires mastering the Microsoft Office tools - at least until Google can build a credible alternative. Note to Eric - can you get the boys to move a bit faster!!!
But do you think anyone younger than 50 has a clue how to use Microsoft Word and it's complex formatting arrangements? Those who are older will know because they grew up with WordStar - which actually worked as advertised.
Technology was supposed to free us from complexity and make life easier - but all it has done (in the case of Microsoft Word) has made the resulting documents so incredibly convoluted that it is impossible to touch them without breaking something important.
All because the people who use it don't read the friggin manual and can't use simple things like *styles*. So we end up with layer upon layer of formatting crap all interacting with the inbuilt Microsoft *features* to create something that on the surface looks like a document. After a year of this and 20+ authors the document becomes unmanageable.
It's much worse when you are trying to run lots of concurrent projects with a team of tech nerds whose ego's all compete - showing off their mastery of the "iphone" and everything else irrelevant that is tech. To them it's a question of "What's the problem"?
So to the Microsoft Word product people - there is one additional key that I need in Word and it's the "Remove Rubbish" key. When pressed it will cycle through the document removing all the rubbish formatting and cleaning the document up. It will have to be as smart as Einstein to know which rubbish to remove - but hey that's Steve Ballmers' problem.
I work in the tech industry and just about everyone who thinks they are a guru has major difficulty with Microsoft Word.
Why? Well they think that because they know some completely irrelevant application or programming language or deep technical *thing* that they are automatically qualified as an *expert* on all things software.
And so they start typing into Word and it accepts their input - and the next thing you know they have created an unholy mess and don't even know it.
What's worse is when they send it to 20 other people and that mess grows like topsy. It becomes a virus that 20 others have a go at to *add their value*.
The interesting thing about the tech business is that much of the day-to-day effort is spent on meetings, developing proposals, writing reports, managing projects and interacting with people. Like many industries, this requires mastering the Microsoft Office tools - at least until Google can build a credible alternative. Note to Eric - can you get the boys to move a bit faster!!!
But do you think anyone younger than 50 has a clue how to use Microsoft Word and it's complex formatting arrangements? Those who are older will know because they grew up with WordStar - which actually worked as advertised.
Technology was supposed to free us from complexity and make life easier - but all it has done (in the case of Microsoft Word) has made the resulting documents so incredibly convoluted that it is impossible to touch them without breaking something important.
All because the people who use it don't read the friggin manual and can't use simple things like *styles*. So we end up with layer upon layer of formatting crap all interacting with the inbuilt Microsoft *features* to create something that on the surface looks like a document. After a year of this and 20+ authors the document becomes unmanageable.
It's much worse when you are trying to run lots of concurrent projects with a team of tech nerds whose ego's all compete - showing off their mastery of the "iphone" and everything else irrelevant that is tech. To them it's a question of "What's the problem"?
So to the Microsoft Word product people - there is one additional key that I need in Word and it's the "Remove Rubbish" key. When pressed it will cycle through the document removing all the rubbish formatting and cleaning the document up. It will have to be as smart as Einstein to know which rubbish to remove - but hey that's Steve Ballmers' problem.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Methinks the Premier doth protest too much
Hamlet Act 3, scene 2, 222–230
The principal meaning of "protest" in Shakespeare's day was "vow" or "declare solemnly", a meaning preserved in our use of "protestation".
When we smugly declare that "the lady doth protest too much," we almost always mean that the lady objects so much as to lose credibility.
Gertrude says that Player Queen affirms so much as to lose credibility. Her vows are too elaborate, too artful, too insistent.
More cynically, the queen may also imply that such vows are silly in the first place, and thus may indirectly defend her own remarriage.
The principal meaning of "protest" in Shakespeare's day was "vow" or "declare solemnly", a meaning preserved in our use of "protestation".
When we smugly declare that "the lady doth protest too much," we almost always mean that the lady objects so much as to lose credibility.
Gertrude says that Player Queen affirms so much as to lose credibility. Her vows are too elaborate, too artful, too insistent.
More cynically, the queen may also imply that such vows are silly in the first place, and thus may indirectly defend her own remarriage.
Sunday, November 22, 2009
Media Mike and the Waitress
The issue is not whether *Media Mike* had sex with *The Waitress*.
The issue is whether "he lied" to the people of South Australia, the parliament, his party colleagues, his staff, his wife and family and anyone else who cares.
I don't know the answer to that.
But I do know that he has prior form with being "economical with the truth" and have often written about it.
Lets wait and see how this one pans out - but my suspicion is that *politicians* and the *truth* - are natural enemies.
The issue is whether "he lied" to the people of South Australia, the parliament, his party colleagues, his staff, his wife and family and anyone else who cares.
I don't know the answer to that.
But I do know that he has prior form with being "economical with the truth" and have often written about it.
Lets wait and see how this one pans out - but my suspicion is that *politicians* and the *truth* - are natural enemies.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Five simple questions
Next year - 2010 - we are going to have a federal election and at least one and probably more state elections. We may also have a "double dissolution" - especially if the *numbnuts* in blue aren't able to get their act together and work out what is in their best interests.
If we end up with a "double dissolution" then we will also be electing *quite a few* senators - like the whole house!
I am assuming that most people know what a "double dissolution" is - although I say that with a certain amount of "wishful thinking" having seen what turns up to a normal federal election.
As an aside, it is sometimes sad and depressing watching and listening to the people who turn up at polling booths - who are so totally unprepared for the event. There is a rather large subset of our community who do ZERO thinking prior to an election and who then make decisions based on *whatever* causes their pencil to move - when they exit the queue. I despair - but they have not been taught to take their democracy seriously - they merely take it for granted.
There is certainly a *BIG* case to be made for a widespread publically funded education campaign across the general population - before ANY election. More will be needed if we end up with something unusual like a DD.
I would like you all to think about the questions that you will ask of your local candidates - and what you will do with the answers because this coming election will be vitally important - probably the most important for 50 years.
You can ask whatever you like - but might I suggest the following five questions as a starting point.
Q1. Where are your loyalties? Are you a party person or do you represent your electorate?
A1. I want an independent thinker who will stand up for the needs of their electorate AHEAD of the needs of his or her political party.
Q2. What is your position on climate change? Do you understand the science and are you commited to dealing with climate change and mitigating the effects for your constituents?
A2. I want a knowleable representative who understands the science and can work as a TEAM player to deal with the issues. I DON'T want grandstanding right wing *numbnuts* who will put their mates in the big polluting industries ahead of their constituents - or who don't think there is a problem.
Q3. What are you doing to enhance and protect the lifestyle of your constituents? Are you aware of the challenges impacting them and how are you dealing with those?
A3. I want a smart thinker - someone who can anticipate problems and issues affecting his or her electorate and who will raise them in the party room - along with possible solutions and answers. For example, an urban member needs to *get* the changing industry situation and work to find alternatives. A rural member needs to *get* the impact of climate change on agriculture and work to find optimal crops and alternatives for his or her constituents.
Q4. What are you doing to understand the longer term threats to the jobs and income of your constituents and the potential opportunities as they arise? Are you thinking about the future and where the threats might come from and how you will prepare your constituents to deal with them? Can you see the opportunties and help your constituents exploit them?
A4. I want someone who can see past next Tuesday. I want a representative who has a significant *strategic* component in their viewport and who can understand the *long term* nature of the game of life.
Q5. What will you do to communicate with your constituents and listen to their views? Can I rely on you to ask us "what we think" in advance of important issues arising in the parliament - and how will you reflect our views back there.
A5. I want someone who treats democracy with respect and who has a well understood engagement process with his or her constituents. Someone who won't *ride roughshod* over the wishes of their constituents.
Now there are many other questions that you might like to ask - but if you can get a positive response to these then that will be a good start.
I have no illusion that we can actually keep them to their word - perhaps someone can work out how to do that prior to the 2013 election ;-)
If we end up with a "double dissolution" then we will also be electing *quite a few* senators - like the whole house!
I am assuming that most people know what a "double dissolution" is - although I say that with a certain amount of "wishful thinking" having seen what turns up to a normal federal election.
As an aside, it is sometimes sad and depressing watching and listening to the people who turn up at polling booths - who are so totally unprepared for the event. There is a rather large subset of our community who do ZERO thinking prior to an election and who then make decisions based on *whatever* causes their pencil to move - when they exit the queue. I despair - but they have not been taught to take their democracy seriously - they merely take it for granted.
There is certainly a *BIG* case to be made for a widespread publically funded education campaign across the general population - before ANY election. More will be needed if we end up with something unusual like a DD.
I would like you all to think about the questions that you will ask of your local candidates - and what you will do with the answers because this coming election will be vitally important - probably the most important for 50 years.
You can ask whatever you like - but might I suggest the following five questions as a starting point.
Q1. Where are your loyalties? Are you a party person or do you represent your electorate?
A1. I want an independent thinker who will stand up for the needs of their electorate AHEAD of the needs of his or her political party.
Q2. What is your position on climate change? Do you understand the science and are you commited to dealing with climate change and mitigating the effects for your constituents?
A2. I want a knowleable representative who understands the science and can work as a TEAM player to deal with the issues. I DON'T want grandstanding right wing *numbnuts* who will put their mates in the big polluting industries ahead of their constituents - or who don't think there is a problem.
Q3. What are you doing to enhance and protect the lifestyle of your constituents? Are you aware of the challenges impacting them and how are you dealing with those?
A3. I want a smart thinker - someone who can anticipate problems and issues affecting his or her electorate and who will raise them in the party room - along with possible solutions and answers. For example, an urban member needs to *get* the changing industry situation and work to find alternatives. A rural member needs to *get* the impact of climate change on agriculture and work to find optimal crops and alternatives for his or her constituents.
Q4. What are you doing to understand the longer term threats to the jobs and income of your constituents and the potential opportunities as they arise? Are you thinking about the future and where the threats might come from and how you will prepare your constituents to deal with them? Can you see the opportunties and help your constituents exploit them?
A4. I want someone who can see past next Tuesday. I want a representative who has a significant *strategic* component in their viewport and who can understand the *long term* nature of the game of life.
Q5. What will you do to communicate with your constituents and listen to their views? Can I rely on you to ask us "what we think" in advance of important issues arising in the parliament - and how will you reflect our views back there.
A5. I want someone who treats democracy with respect and who has a well understood engagement process with his or her constituents. Someone who won't *ride roughshod* over the wishes of their constituents.
Now there are many other questions that you might like to ask - but if you can get a positive response to these then that will be a good start.
I have no illusion that we can actually keep them to their word - perhaps someone can work out how to do that prior to the 2013 election ;-)
Innovation - what is that?
I have been thinking about innovation for a while now - probably for much of my life.
But it seems that few others are. I constantly see and hear political leaders who should know better talking about how this or that industry is dying and causing unemployment and bad times all around.
The mainstream media and the state governments are the worst offenders with one state in particular - South Australia - seeming to have no ability to adjust and re-invent itself.
Because that is what the nation needs - vigorous and constant re-invention. But clearly that isn't going to happen without some quality leadership and smart people who are prepared to understand the options and take some risks.
Focussing on South Australia for a moment - it's not like the place is naturally endowed with high quality resources - it has had some real leaders in the past who took risks and did some good things for the state.
Tom Playford recognised that he needed to build an industrial base to employ the growing population when he acquired steel and vehicle manufacturing industries for South Australia.
Don Dunstan worked hard to build a high value arts culture and that has paid real dividends for the state - both in terms of local jobs and international recognition and reputation.
But who since has had any vision or foresight or ability to recognise the challenges and do anything significant about them?
Dean Brown wanted to make the place the silicon village of the southern hemisphere and ended up destroying around 300 small businesses and god knows how many jobs - while handing $billions to a US multinational. It's not like he wasn't warned.
I'm not sure what John Olsen was trying to do but he ended up being forced out of the parliament on the back of dodgy dealings with another American multinational. And now he works for the current Labor government.
Mike Rann has been spruiking the *mining boom* as the saviour of the place. But even he knows that mining employs around 1% of the working population. I wonder what he has in mind for the remaining 99%?
Oh I forgot *defence*. Another industry that requires lots of capital and employs many people in California and elsewhere but bugger all in South Australia.
As an aside, today we discovered that the Howard government was far from the "world's best economic manager" - and gave away the farm because Peter's Costello and Dutton were acting like *dummies*.
So to my serious question - "Is anyone in or close to power actually thinking about what needs to be done to maintain a high standard of living for the current population - going into the second decade of the 21st century"?
And if they are could they please share that with the people - and demonstrate that they have the brains and ideas needed to make the place competitive as we head into 2010.
Basically people you have three choices - "Lead", "Follow" or "get out of the way".
But it seems that few others are. I constantly see and hear political leaders who should know better talking about how this or that industry is dying and causing unemployment and bad times all around.
The mainstream media and the state governments are the worst offenders with one state in particular - South Australia - seeming to have no ability to adjust and re-invent itself.
Because that is what the nation needs - vigorous and constant re-invention. But clearly that isn't going to happen without some quality leadership and smart people who are prepared to understand the options and take some risks.
Focussing on South Australia for a moment - it's not like the place is naturally endowed with high quality resources - it has had some real leaders in the past who took risks and did some good things for the state.
Tom Playford recognised that he needed to build an industrial base to employ the growing population when he acquired steel and vehicle manufacturing industries for South Australia.
Don Dunstan worked hard to build a high value arts culture and that has paid real dividends for the state - both in terms of local jobs and international recognition and reputation.
But who since has had any vision or foresight or ability to recognise the challenges and do anything significant about them?
Dean Brown wanted to make the place the silicon village of the southern hemisphere and ended up destroying around 300 small businesses and god knows how many jobs - while handing $billions to a US multinational. It's not like he wasn't warned.
I'm not sure what John Olsen was trying to do but he ended up being forced out of the parliament on the back of dodgy dealings with another American multinational. And now he works for the current Labor government.
Mike Rann has been spruiking the *mining boom* as the saviour of the place. But even he knows that mining employs around 1% of the working population. I wonder what he has in mind for the remaining 99%?
Oh I forgot *defence*. Another industry that requires lots of capital and employs many people in California and elsewhere but bugger all in South Australia.
As an aside, today we discovered that the Howard government was far from the "world's best economic manager" - and gave away the farm because Peter's Costello and Dutton were acting like *dummies*.
So to my serious question - "Is anyone in or close to power actually thinking about what needs to be done to maintain a high standard of living for the current population - going into the second decade of the 21st century"?
And if they are could they please share that with the people - and demonstrate that they have the brains and ideas needed to make the place competitive as we head into 2010.
Basically people you have three choices - "Lead", "Follow" or "get out of the way".
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Lots of fear in "Animal Farm"
These are my observations about how the people of South Australia feel about themselves.
Firstly, we have the annual "Christmas Pageant" - I won't discuss that here, 1950's kitch in my view - but the locals seem to think it is a good thing and lap it up.
Secondly, we have the daily "photo" on the ABC News at 7pm. The only place where there is such a thing all attributed to a viewer - clearly the ABC have worked out that this is vitally important - perhaps the other states need to follow suit ;-)
Thirdly, we have a major water crisis in the state - caused by 30+ years worth of inaction and laziness by various state governments and yet the local newspaper, the current government and the people responsible are happy to keep *smiling for the cameras*.
There are many other quaint little *things* that define the place but perhaps the most interesting is the current state government.
For eight long years - count them on 8 fingers - the state has had Mike Rann running the place - supposedly in a perpetual *trifecta* with Kevin Foley and Patrick Conlon. Apparently these three are the *brains* trust behind the government and have the place humming along like a well oiled machine!
But the people there have been well and truly goosed - no-one speaks up, no-one complains and no-one says boo to a duck about the way they have been treated. This has been the case for aeons.
And the reason is simple - *fear*.
The locals are all fearful - "for their jobs", "of their neighbors", "of a crime wave", "of the government" but most importantly - they fear a "letter from the Transport Department".
Because the place has created this amazing government scam where they raise enormous revenue from "red-light" and "speed" cameras. The traffic system is poorly designed (it hasn't evolved much since the 60's) and seems designed to *trap* the locals who then end up with enormous *fines* when they attempt to traverse the road network.
Just about everyone knows they are being screwed - but most of them say nothing and will only express their *anger* when they next are asked to vote - in other words - "keep your head down and express your concern at the ballot box".
I suppose this is democracy in action - SA style?
Firstly, we have the annual "Christmas Pageant" - I won't discuss that here, 1950's kitch in my view - but the locals seem to think it is a good thing and lap it up.
Secondly, we have the daily "photo" on the ABC News at 7pm. The only place where there is such a thing all attributed to a viewer - clearly the ABC have worked out that this is vitally important - perhaps the other states need to follow suit ;-)
Thirdly, we have a major water crisis in the state - caused by 30+ years worth of inaction and laziness by various state governments and yet the local newspaper, the current government and the people responsible are happy to keep *smiling for the cameras*.
There are many other quaint little *things* that define the place but perhaps the most interesting is the current state government.
For eight long years - count them on 8 fingers - the state has had Mike Rann running the place - supposedly in a perpetual *trifecta* with Kevin Foley and Patrick Conlon. Apparently these three are the *brains* trust behind the government and have the place humming along like a well oiled machine!
But the people there have been well and truly goosed - no-one speaks up, no-one complains and no-one says boo to a duck about the way they have been treated. This has been the case for aeons.
And the reason is simple - *fear*.
The locals are all fearful - "for their jobs", "of their neighbors", "of a crime wave", "of the government" but most importantly - they fear a "letter from the Transport Department".
Because the place has created this amazing government scam where they raise enormous revenue from "red-light" and "speed" cameras. The traffic system is poorly designed (it hasn't evolved much since the 60's) and seems designed to *trap* the locals who then end up with enormous *fines* when they attempt to traverse the road network.
Just about everyone knows they are being screwed - but most of them say nothing and will only express their *anger* when they next are asked to vote - in other words - "keep your head down and express your concern at the ballot box".
I suppose this is democracy in action - SA style?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
