o.k. so i’m just getting around to unloading taylor’s extensive monologue on the content management bit that i snarkily blogged awhile ago [yes, i’m barely keeping my head above water on this whole blogging thing – i do have a dayjob you know]. i make snarky comments while taylor actually makes the effort to say something meaningful [indicative of why i apparently have one faithful reader]:

“My real feelings is that content management is going to be the basis for all future operating systems. We have too much information stuff, and we want all of our personal information sphere to interoperate will our environment. We need something to manage all this. And we need it to work in a way that doesn’t require a call to an engineer to make changes. ”

psssst. taylor also links to a discussion on content management systems that you might find interesting:

“The basic message to that article is that you’ll be better off writing a custom Content Management System for your company than you will be if you use one from a vendor like Vignette. Those tools (pre-packaged CMS’s) require so much customization that you end up writing most of a CMS anyway, they claim.

What I think the author misses is that it’s a lot of work to write the underside of a CMS. Sure, Vignette’s system has a lousy reputation among those who actually use it, mainly because their workflow system sucks… but what so many companies will find is that it’s an awesome amount of work to try to develop the services that Vignette provides in your own in-house product… and then you have to try to support it. If IT staffs were static, that would be fine, but they’re not.”

even more fodder for the ‘rhetoric box’ from jakob. this one’s a keeper:

“”Most Internet entrepreneurs treat the users’ attention as a Third World country to be strip-mined,” said Jakob Nielsen, a Silicon Valley expert on software usability.”

i really need to update the ‘rhetoric’ box. respect, schrespect. i like to see wholesale dismissal of the customer. i mean, c’mon, it’s not the technology’s fault. it’s that stupid freakin’ guy that’s buying the stuff:

“”To say that all people are giving their permission for Scour to do this is wrong,” said Bruce Forest, director of new-media projects for Viant Inc., an Internet services firm. “The average lug can’t configure a VCR, let alone a secure Internet connection.””

i understand the point that bruce is trying to make, but it would seem that the blame game should be directed at the obfuscation perpetuated by the technology providers – not the ‘average lug’.

so somebody at alistapart isn’t very happy with the maturation of blogging. indeed it could be considered boring, or even – mundane:

“Is this all the web is for, trying to bring the world to us and measure our success in hits and links? Or is the gift of the web its potential to bring our true selves to the world? Not our mundane musings and shout outs to people who recognize us on their home page because we use the same stupid software, but the depths of what is within us. What if everyone spoke their minds and actually put some effort into it? How about presenting who you are – what you are made of – what drives your inner being? Take a chance and create without bounds. Don’t waste the power the web has given us in a hit-seeking circle jerk.”

but alas, poor soul, if only you opened your mind to the profundity inherent in the mundane

“Should we be surprised at the idea that telling the untold stories of the mundane can be perceived as an act of such potential violence that the mere reference to mundane activities needs be banned from the public domain? Not, I submit, if we keep in mind the interrelation between the mundane, storytelling, the untellable, untold story and the construction of the human. In my discussion of Bohannon and the Tiv, I mentioned the manner in which spelling out the story of the mundane makes us strangers to ourselves. If storytelling produces and perpetuates our construction of the human, and the limits of stories are humanity’s limits, the mundane rests on precisely that crux: its presence is necessary for being human, but its story cannot be told — for investigating the parameters of the mundane will radically distort our assumption of our own humanity.”

“And if looking at the mundane can reveal how the limit of our humanity lies deep inside us, rather than somewhere in our outer reaches, we may well be in a position to recognize our identity with and responsibility towards the infinite diversity of beings who share our planet.”

interesting read in cio on the importance of “information design”:

“Like everyone else in an organization, IT professionals are aiming to pick up their pace and their reach. But while many companies are addressing the escalating demand for information by creating larger “storage bins” and making sure they can pull more information through their expansive networks, others have begun to realize that it’s just not going to be that easy.”

“Andersen Consulting’s Institute for Strategic Change asked IT executives if they had a process for developing actionable information, and they answered with a resounding no. Eighty-six percent
reported that they have no process or that they plan to use the traditional IT requirements definition and data-modeling processes. These are the same processes that have been instrumental in creating today’s nonactionable information environment. In either case, they aren’t talking about an information design process.”

the reports of feed and suck joining forces is all over the place, but i’m going to blog ’em anyway, so i can capture them in the glorified annotated bookmark bin [and who says there is no place for self-referential linking].

anyway, zdnet has a nice overview that the new parent of the two online pubs, automatic media, is going to focus on building communities, instead on generating content:

“All of the sites owned by Automatic Media will share a common advertising sales force, technology and administrative resources, a move that should cut costs and increase the efficiency of individual sites. The Webzines will maintain their distinctive brand names and editorial voices, though they plan to weave hyperlinks to each other throughout their respective sites.”

“Automatic Media doesn’t expect most of its growth to come from
hiring teams of high-paid journalists and writers to expand editorial operations. Instead, the
company plans to place a growing emphasis on user participation in discussions about the stories
and columns on Feed, Suck and other editorial sites. That approach, aimed at attracting
advertisers as the user base grows, has the double advantage of being highly interactive and
relatively cheap.”

dave contributes his 2 cents and homes in on this important point:

“The Web is not a mirror of the print industry, that’s why advertising is not so important. The unique thing about the Web is that it’s interactive. We all know that. The challenge is to squeeze quality, high-integrity writing out of the readers, and present it back to them with your seal of quality. That’s a much employing writers and running ads as the print industry does.

I was disappointed to see that Automatic Media is using SlashDot-style conferencing for the Suck-Feed
combination. I strongly believe this is the wrong approach. Better to start new Sucks and Feeds using the traditions of sarcasm and literacy that each of these pubs have done such a great job of starting.”

{ intertwingled since 2000 }