The internet connection started working at my new unit today. Shiny new ADSL2 connection so no more 1500k connection limit for me. Technically my ISP doesn’t know it’s up and running yet so they haven’t activated the VOIP line that’s bundled and the connections capped at 3000k which is what it’s happily connecting at. In the next couple of days that should get sorted out and it will jump up to a cap of 24000k. It remains to be seen how fast my actual connection will be given the poor quality phone lines generally found in Australia.

So Doug is excited about how we took our first steps in a new product and how well it went. Personally, I’m impressed with the way that we presented all the usual engineering setup tasks to the client in a client focussed manner. We could have done it better by not discussing up front all the engineering tasks we were hiding behind the suggested first story, but that’s okay. The first story was that we wanted to ship a distribution of the new product. It’s really quite backwards to think of things that way – normally you build the product then work out how to package and distribute it, but it’s impossible to ship anytime if you don’t build the distribution mechanism at the start.

I spent some time this afternoon trying to reduce the amount of spam that gets downloaded and dumped into my spam folder. Between SpamAssassin and Mail.app’s spam filters there’s basically no spam that makes it through to my inbox, but the sheer amount of spam being sent to symphonious.net, then downloaded from their to my home IMAP server before finally being processed by SpamAssassin is overwhelming and takes up a lot of bandwidth and processing time. Besides, with that much spam going into my spam folder I haven’t been bothered reviewing it so if there are any false positives they are pretty much doomed.

I’ve long been a proponent of UI designers making decisions about what the best way to do something is instead of just providing configuration options to the user – after all, if you are a fully trained and experienced UI designer, shouldn’t you know better than your completely untrained users? Seeing some of the discussion going around about Joel’s criticism of the Windows shutdown menu, including Arno Gourdol’s comments on the Mac OS X shutdown options and they both seem to being taking it a little bit too far.

Robert Scoble:

I’d love to know what you think? Does any of the Office 2.0 vendors have a chance to edge in on Microsoft’s market?

Edge in – sure, it’s been happening for at least the past 5 years or more. I’ve lost count of the number of times we’ve sold EditLive! to companies who were replacing Word to make life more pleasant for users. Notably though, these aren’t situations in Word’s core target market – creating documents destined for print. Word has picked up a lot of market share in all kinds of weird and wonderful content creation scenarios that it wasn’t designed for and it’s picked up features to make it work quite well there. Despite that, these fringe areas are ripe for competitors to specialize in and provide solutions that fit better with the user’s intentions.

I’ve just moved my blog and email hosting over to an unmanaged VPS running Debian so I no longer have to fight an extremely outdated RedHat and an awful Plesk control panel to get stuff done. It comes as quite a surprise that I’m finding the software in the Debian stable APT archives refreshingly up to date. Still no PHP4, but I have apache 2 and Python 2.4 (as opposed to Python 2.2 previously) so I’m happy.

So Microsoft has decided to specify licensing terms for anyone who wants to develop an Office 2007 style UI. I can’t help but think that this is somewhat hypocritical considering Microsoft was the beneficiary of a rather important case against Apple regarding copying of user interface ideas. I also find it odd that Microsoft is using licensing techniques to enforce the way the ribbon and similar ideas work instead of just making the actual component implementations available to everyone thus guaranteeing that they always work the same way (including in future updates).

While a couple of people got ahead of things and announced the engineering release of EditLive! 6.0 – the marketing team completed deployment of the web site updates today and so EditLive! 6.0 final is officially available to everyone.

Now we just need to get better at updating the official Ephox Weblog instead of just our own blogs…

There’s a somewhat inevitable drawback of ideas that work out well – they continue on much longer than you anticipated. Such is the case with the mess of AppleScript, UNIX commands and Excel spreadsheet that makes up our engineering statistics tracking system. It tracks bug counts, test coverage, velocity etc over time and produces a bunch of graphs that we can look at and try and work out what they mean. It’s by no means mission critical but it is interesting to see what’s going on from day to day. The trouble is, now that we’ve come to like having those graphs, the fact that this mess of scripts can only actually run on my laptop is something of a concern.

Stupid wordpress still not supporting Atom 1.0. Stupid upgrade that overwrote my changes to make it support Atom 1.0. Yay for the cool plugin that will avoid this problem in the future. Also yay for the fact that it works out of the box with PHP 4 instead of using PHP 5 only functions for the date. Here’s hoping it gets the time zones correct.

I spent some time yesterday playing around with Venus to aggregate the various Ephox related blogs. The result is current at test.symphonious.net but will either disappear or move somewhere more official depending on how we like it. I’m keen to see what people think of it. Hopefully we can encourage a few more Ephox people to make the leap into blogging.

A while back I complained that the FireFox 2.0 installer didn’t include an actual link to the Applications folder. This morning I saw that this wasn’t just a theoretical problem, nor was it just a problem for “stupid users”. One of our engineers, who is very bright and good with computers but with no real Mac OS experience, had to install FireFox 2.0 on one of our testing Macs. He dragged the FireFox icon onto the picture of the Applications folder. The lack of text made the problem even worse – he wasn’t familiar with the Applications folder icon on OS X so didn’t realize it was meant to be representative of the destination instead of being the destination in and of itself.