Joel understands what takes to make something ship...

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2009/09/23.html

Why is IPhone successful?

For the same reason the PC of the 90s was. Thousands of applications written by developers with specific domain knowledge. Microsoft opened their API and a flood of applications pushed the PC to huge volumes. Apple was pushing the Mac at the time and wanted to retain control and thus did not facilitate outside development without some sort of licensing. This was the difference in the 90s. A parallel situation is happening again with the iPhone. Apple has opened development of iPhone / iPod application to the development horde and is benefiting from it. Don't misunderstand... You can make mucho dinero selling a proprietary charger and accessories to a captive audience. The difference is this, Apple has fallen back to making sure they control the hardware. They realized that software by it's digital nature want's to be open, low cost, and democratic. This is why I find no surprise that they let Spotify coexist with iTunes. It's about using software to sell the hardware. This strategy is paying off in spades; congratulations Mr. Jobs for learning from past experiences. Based on this my question to you is, is the iPhone hardware the razor or the razor blades?

Truth is stranger than fiction

Some of my curious collection of sites.

RunPee - Tells you when you can go pee during a movie

http://www.gotahoe.com/ gotahoe? GOTaHOE oh... GOtahoe What an unfortunate Domain name.

FailBlog and the sub site EngrishFunny

Here's a seasonal favorite Elf yourself!

The Squirrellizer!

The Dialectizer... Try FoxNews!

Pirates punishment disproportionate

I'm scratching my head here. Personally, I'm against piracy, however, I don't understand the RIAA's vigorous pursuit of peer sharing thieves. At the same time I do believe the old methods of music distribution are dying. The music industry is fighting hard against this but the result is inevitable. Like the buggy whip before the car, the store bought album is approaching it's sunset.

What got me to write this is two recent articles I read.

Whats next for Jammie Thomas-Rasset

Mrs. Thomas-Rasset had a judgment of $80,000 per song x 24 songs = $1.92 mil. All she did is drop some files in a directory (and tried to cover it up later).

But consider the take down of Rabid Neurosis. They had an outright organization promoting the stealing and active distribution of the music they stole. Some of it was even stolen before it hit shelves, thus competing directly with the studio's roll out of the album.

Feds crack Rabid Neurosis prerelease piracy group

Their possible fine... wait for it...

A maximum five-year sentence and $250,000 fine.

I realize one is a civil suit and the other is criminal. Wouldn't you agree something is still wrong here?

Get rid of the dead wood

A coworker and I were discussing the nature of IT in large organizations. I firmly believe that software can be created and deployed by large organizations but better software and better service comes from small organizations. Many experts will tell you that the amount of communication increases rapidly as team size increases. That is a factor yes, but my thought is that big companies have a larger percentage of deadwood. Most large companies have so many people that are arranged in silos and want to do very little if it is outside their domain or comfort zone. Most small companies have people that wear multiple hats and aren't afraid to learn something new or roll up the sleeves to get it done. That being said I have worked in teams in a big company that were competent and completed on time and under budget. Why is this like this? It's the nature of how big companies want to manage their staff. They offer buyouts (politically correct choice) to get rid of the deadwood and guess who takes it... the people that get the job done. Why? Because they can thrive elsewhere and they know it. The deadwood is comfortable staying where they are at (and they know it). Think about it.