Social Software: traction in a single term

People who read my blog (Hello to all six of you!) seem to have taken an interest (a la Geisler’s “taken an interest” dialog in Barton Fink, which fills my obscure reference quota for the day) in this term “social software.” It seems to have a kind of descriptive grab that might be able to thwart the inevitable corporate co-option that befalls so many once-useful terms. (Yes, I implicate wonks like myself as dangerous to all things meaningful; marketing mis-use and overuse has ground many-a-useful concept into pulpy buzz-word market-speak.)

I mentioned in a previous post that I re-wrote the Wikipedia definition for Social Software. (Wikipedia now states, “This article needs to be cleaned up to conform to a higher standard of article quality.” No small amount of umbrage I take from that!)

Now I’ll state that while I have used the term, and pushed the term inside Novell during our planning for the Hula Project announcement, I should confess that I have yet to complete a lot of research on many of the technologies that the Wikipedia definition cites as examples. (I think I may have some command of email and instant messages, and I’m getting there with blogs…)

The “AfterNet” –this post 1990’s Interenet age we’re living in–has an emergent, underground social fabric that is coming out in a variety of media. Some of these are definitely “social” in how they enable collaboration (wikis, IM’s and such), but some are also social in how they create new methods for expression. Scott Lemon, who has long held a hypothesis that the Net is the glue that is actually transforming humanity into a new type of organism, has been tracking some media collage sites lately. (And somehow one of these actually links back to the same Jamie Zawinksi that helped guide Nat’s thinking away from the “groupware albatross”.) These are arguably social, but they are not necessarily collaborative.

Now that I have freely rambled and associated a mish-mash of ideas with little direction and too many parentheticals, I have reached an Abe Simpson impass. Did I have a point launching into this?

More on Collaboration, Courtesy of Cape Town, ZA

Today I got a suprise response on the Hula Project entry. Jesse Pretorius, a former colleague from South Africa, shared some insights on directions he thinks Collaboration tools need to go. In addition to having the coolest sounding surname, Jesse shows he understands something about what’s wrong with the current collaboration technologies in the market. [Click the link above to see his full comments.] Not having a collaboration system is kind of like not having a car in Los Angeles–impractical. But that doesn’t mean that we should not be looking critically at what systems are available today and pondering ways to fix them.

On a tangentially-related note, one of the features I really like about Evolution is the quick search that is conveniently located right above the message list. It lets you quickly find what you’re looking for without having to open up a new window or hit a key or go up to a menu. It’s just there, letting you quickly find what you’re looking for. [Look for "Subject contains" in this graphic and you'll see what I'm referring to.]

Such user accomodations are a great help, but perhaps they are exposing that we have a more serious problem on our hands. Certainly by Jesse’s comments, this feature only scratches the surface.

Jesse makes the point that our current set of available collaboration tools actually make the information overload problem worse. What that indicates to me is that technology is doing exactly the opposite of what many feel that it is supposed to do (make our lives easier). Along with some key colleagues of mine, I am hoping that we can start to address the issue that Jesse points out.

P.S. Oh, and previously I mentioned that I’m thinking more and more about social software. if you haven’t checked out del.icio.us yet, you should give it a look. You can share interesting bookmarks with others (mine, still so young, is here), and access your own bookmarks from multiple machines. Firefox has a plugin called foxylicious that shows promise, too.

Blackberry to GroupWise

I just got a Blackberry today and I’m going to start using it with my Novell GroupWise account.

I have never gotten any PDA to work effectively for me. (Bad work habits.)

I’ll let you know how it goes.

Luis Villa, we miss ya!

At LinuxWorld Expo in Boston, I got the chance to catch up with gnome.org’s Luis Villa. Luis is the former Ximian guy who lead the main engineering team for Novell Linux Desktop 9 under Nat Friedman, and is a really cool guy. After delivering on Novell Linux Desktop 9, he decided to part ways with Novell, but he remains active with gnome.org.

Luis pitched to me his views on the differences between KDE and GNOME. What I like most about Luis comes out in his approach to talking about things like this: instead of building a massive case for why KDE sucks and why GNOME is the best thing since canned beer, he delineated the philosophical differences between KDE (absolute fine-tuned, granular control of the whole interface) and GNOME (ease of use through a very clean, simple, no-nonsense interface). Luis’s contention is that in order for desktop Linux to make it out of the geek-enthusiast space into broader and more general use, we need to concentrate on simplification rather than deeper control of tweaks and options.

Luis’s biggest point though was that the great KDE-GNOME debate, a fence which Novell has chosen to straddle, is hindering ISV support of Linux because the ISV’s do not have a single, clear development path to get behind. Said Luis, Novell has a unique opportunity to stand side by side on stage with Sun and Red Hat and make a clear statement to resolve this once and for all for the greater good of desktop Linux. An interesting observation, whether you agree or not.

[Aside: I am paraphrasing what Luis said to me, so flame replies to this blog entry really won't be necessary. Level-headed counterpoints are very much welcome. I continue to withhold my opinion from this blog, as I am still learning about this whole area.]

Luis posts frequently to his own blog, where he chronicles a lot of the things he is working on in open source. If you would like to peak into the head of one of the interesting and articulate hackers in open source, Luis’s work is fun to follow.

More on Hula

Nat emailed me this morning with a message that this “social software” term I have been advocating for use with the Hula announcement appears to have some grab.

Wikipedia defines “social software” quite well as:

Social software is a broad term used to describe Internet-based software that facilitates group interaction. Social software connects people together intellectually and makes it possible to share and evolve ideas. Social software is not bound just by what features the tool provides, but also by social conventions and etiquette on how to use it appropriately. Such software includes email, Usenet, IRC, instant messaging, blogs, wikis, NNTP, folksonomy, and virtual online communities.

In fact, I used that definition to state a case to Bryan Cardoza (my peer on the product management side) and Nat in some of our early meetings. After using the Wikipedia definition to convince them that “social software” was the right term for our vision of Hula, I told them that I had in fact re-written the Wikipedia definition the night before. (It’s all in the name of complete, albeit ex post facto, intellectual honesty.)

Looking smart for lifting someone else’s term is always fun. Giving appropriate credit where due, I picked up the term from Christopher Allen’s blog called Life With Alacrity, in which had an entry called “Tracing the Evolution of Social Software.”

Finally, for some in-depth insight into the early thinking behind Hula complete with strong language rarely seen in my blog and an allusion to Coleridge’s Ancient Mariner, I recommend you read this blog entry from Nat’s pre-Hula confidant Jamie Zawinski. That is in fact what Nat sent me in his email, stating that perhaps I actually do know what I’m talking about, Wikipedia aside.

eDirectory API’s and the desktop

Reader Omac asks:

I read recently that Novell will release some of the APIs used in eDirectory to the FreeRadius open source group. Could you comment on the impact upon the desktop user?

We made the FreeRADIUS/eDirectory API announcement at the RSA conference on Monday. My good friend (and frequent hiking companion) Tim Harris was a principle driving force behind this effort, launching us into it about a year ago when I still covered the eDirectory product line. Tim elucidated the need for eDirectory to support LEAP/EAP compliance for wireless authentication. (He listened to customers and help engineers deliver on requirements–such novelty.)

Anyway, to Omac’s question, will this have an impact on the desktop user? Absolutely! The first thing that will happen is that this clears the path for wireless authentication to eDirectory for both Windows and Linux desktops.

But I’ll presume that Omac’s question is aimed at Novell Linux Desktop and address that as best I can. First, we’re at an early stage in the process, but already, Tim has worked to get some of these changes into the SUSE LINUX distribution code base. That will immediately inject awareness into our developers, and the way we manage components in the distribution, it means that we’re now set up to support it over a long period of time.

One thing the announcement does not change is the path that we are on for getting Novell Linux Desktop authentication to eDirectory done. We were working on that authentication prior to–and separate from–this announcement. Since I run out of substantive content at this point, I’ll ask Tim to chime in a response to this entry.

The Hula Project

More from LinuxWorld Expo:

We got the Hula announcement went out today and www.project-hula.org is now open. This announcement was a really taxing effort for us to get ready—the time between identifying that it was the right thing to do and when the right time to do it (LinuxWorld, Boston) was pretty short. Getting everything together was a fast ride.

I continue to be impressed with the speed that Nat Friedman can get use his personal network to make things happen. Having OSS heavyweights like OSAF’s Mitch Kapor, Mozilla’s Mitch Baker, OSDL’s Stuart Cohen backing the project with their endorsements is all Nat’s doing.

Right after Jack Messman’s ketnote, Novell held a press conference and amid the other significant announcements from Novell, Hula commanded the first three or four questions. The Gartner Group’s Senior Analyst covering collaboration, Maureen Grey, called to ask questions (and remind us that we should give her at least a little heads-up on something of this magnitude). So, a good reception so far.

I haven’t used this blog to talk much about collaboration. And, I’ve been sitting on a half-composed rant about what has gone wrong with email (why do so many now loathe email, when it was once such a boon to doing business).

I’ll also probably do a fair amount of talking about GroupWise, which is Novell’s traditional full-featured collaboration offering. I cover marketing for GroupWise as well Hula/NetMail, and I’m getting ready to become very vocal about where we’re taking GroupWise, as seen in last week’s roadmap announcement.

Evolution on Windows

Greetings from LinuxWorld in Boston. At least, that’s where I think I am. I can’t really tell, since, I was in analyst meetings most of the day. I have not even seen the show yet.

At the recent Desktop Summit in San Diego, I met the illustrious Chris Pirillo from TechTV. He was bouncing around our booth praising Novell for saying that we’re porting Evolution to Windows. It turns out that he read it on Nat Friedman’s blog. But anyway, he was really excited about it and after we met, he posted about it on his own blog. So, then he replied to an email I sent him telling me that maybe he melted Nat’s webserver. Chris has some readers.

Anyway, Novell Linux Desktop is up for “Best Open Source Solution” at LinuxWorld. That would be a cool one!

Desktop Summit in San Diego

I presented a session for Novell at the Desktop Summit in San Diego today. (The same one for which I had to write my bio, which thankfully was revised by the talented Mr. Jeff Allen.)

The session went very well. I had a bit of trepidation about the subject I presented. Besides Novell’s strategy for helping customers use Linux in their enterprises, I talked a bit about how the attendees should look at themselves as marketers–key links in the network that will accelerate the adoption of desktop Linux.

My premises were essentially these:

• Don’t fall for the “Is it ready yet?” trap
  • The trap is really asking: Is it Windows yet?
  • Desktop Linux doesn’t need to become Windows. (In fact, if we succeed at cloning Windows, then we have actually failed.)
  • Ask “Ready for What”? There are roles for which Linux is already much better than Windows.
• Speak truthfully about the capabilities and limitations of desktop Linux. (Those who read my blog would expect me to cover this one.)
  • Winning in the short run, but having people ultimately get disappointed works against desktop Linux.
• Pay for the Linux desktop distribution you use
  • Most open source development–especially the refinement–is coming out of a company like Novell, Red Hat, Mandrake and so on. When you pay for what you use, you help that company keep makingbetter
    both the distribution and the general pool of source code.
• Quantify
  • If you are deploying any desktop Linux in your organization, make sure you do the diligence to quantify the return on investment. It helps you to show why your organization is using Linux on the desktop.
• Testify
  • Work with your distro vendor and go public with your results and experiences. The business world is hungry for data and examples.

This whole thing has some controversial stuff in it to purists. Like “pay for what you use.” Apparently there were presenters yesterday who used the rhetoric of “it should all be free,” which is so tired sounding to me.

Many people came up and thanked me for my presentation and said it was dead on. I was pleased to do it, and to those who shared their kind words, I say: thanks for your kind words. And also for lending me your ear in the first place.

I always feel so fortunate to have opportunities where I can talk to the people who are so enthusiastic and passionate to help affect this change in how software is done.

You have to be smarter than that, Mr. Berlind

David Berlind recently blogged “ex-World Bank CTO: Desktop Linux Interrupted” in which he states:

If you’re a member of the press and you write anything that’s remotely critical of Linux’s chances of success on the desktop (which I have), the Linux community unleashes a fury of fire and brimstone upon you.

I try to stay practical about desktop Linux and I have seen a flare ups about things I have said in various Linux forums. But for every person who has flown off on some tangental invective about a term I may have used or mis-used, I have found that there is someone else who will post a level-headed “I think what he was trying to say was…” reply.

But I might proffer something to Mr. Berlind that is perhaps outrageous in our world of cable news networks and knee-jerk journalism: do some research before you go to print. Even in a blog you should do at least some cursory fact checking.

In the same article, Mr. Berlind makes this statement:

In my writings about desktop *nix offerings from Sun (Java Desktop System) and Novell (Novell Linux Desktop), one of my criticisms was exactly this OEM problem. Though the offerings come from two vendors with whom corporations are comfortable dealing, just try finding the hardware that they’re certified to run on, much less pre-installed on….

He follows this statement by riffing about Wal*Mart not being a top tier vendor or even a tier at all. Clumsy humor aside, this is where Mr. Berlind should have done his research and updated on the status of certified and pre-installed systems.

Not long ago, Steven Vaughan-Nichols of eWeek reported that HP, a small Texas-based PC manufacturer who must have sprung up overnight, are offering pre-build systems running Novell Linux Desktop through their Factory Express program. (Interestingly enough, Mr. Vaughan-Nichols and I have had a press mishap at one point, and I have found him to be very gracious at making corrections.)

IBM, who some time ago started certifying several workstation and personal systems for both SUSE LINUX and Red Hat Linux, goes so far as to publish guides in their Red Book series on how to migrate from Windows to Linux desktops. (Several references to Novell Linux Desktop in there…and it comes up on IBM’s site with a pretty simple keyword search of “Novell Linux Desktop.”)

And Intel has been a very active partner with Novell, even showing up in Novell’s kickoff webcast for Novell Linux Desktop back in December. In the Novell webcast, Intel supplied slides showing the system boards that they have certified for Linux. (A search on “Novell Linux Desktop” on Intel’s site shows that they are keeping on top of driver updates for their certified system boards, too. Sweet!)

It’s dangerous to blog without checking facts. The people who read online material like blogs are well-connected fact checkers. “Fire and brimstone” replies for opions of dissent are part of living in blogspace. But one caveat: by publishing ill-informed opinion of dissent is perhaps just being cheaply provocative. If that’s the case, you might find that people aren’t so ready to jump to your defense.

The Reverend’s Nemesis

In order to add a little more of a human-interest/tabloid-drama element to my blog, I have decided to pin unfairly all my worldy problems on one person.

Just to make sure people know who the bane of my very existence is, this is him:

If you see him, please smack him on the head, upside or otherwise. Why? He can outrun me. (And does.)

I have seen the future and I’m not as fast.

I end this entry by quoting one of my favorite cartoon characters, Mutley, when I say:

Razzle frazzle fricken fracken.