Normally, after a few years of *something* existing it’s time to party. Perhaps a re-design, re-purpose or simple “thank you” to all those who have followed the ups and downs and still continue to tag along for the ride.

If there is one universal constant, it is that I am not normal. Another is that what goes up, must (eventually) come down.

And it is with a combination of sadness (and hope) that I officially close down smackfoo.com. Whilst the site will remain active for posterities sake¹ it will cease to be my primary voice and will as such not see updates.

It’s also time to bid Wordpress goodbye. It’s been a fine vehicle for basic content management, but is simply not heading in a direction that I chose to follow. It is increasingly difficult to maintain code for the platform and consumes more time than it really should.

I have always appreciated the chance to share ideas and philosophies² and I thank each and every visitor and regular alike for dropping by.

As I’ve hinted at previously there is however, a new love in my life. The Lab has been quietly taking shape and has developed over a few months of mixing chemicals and powders together to see what explodes. The odd scorching aside it’s worked out pretty well.

Thus, I would like to invite you all to visit the Atomic Ninja Labs — my new home.

1. Wordpress themes and plugins will remain available. (↩)
2. not to mention all the discussion generated behind the scenes (↩)

I recently received an email from Joyent’s Kristie Wells, asking a pointed, yet perhaps fair question.

I wanted to reach out and see if I could ascertain the sour taste in your mouth for Joyent. I know you host with MT and S3. That’s cool, I have just seen more than one posting from you about not liking us and would love to know more. Feel like sharing?

Whenever I read an article or comment, that paints an open source product as though it was instantaneously better than closed source, simply because it’s open, it invariably results in one, simple question. Why?

The back-story here is that I have in the past questioned some of Joyent’s motives, where talk and action didn’t appear to align. It isn’t really a case of having a go at Joyent itself and it’s certainly not a “sour” viewpoint either, although I can see how it might appear that way.

Rather it is in reaction to the occasional belief expressed that suggests Open Solaris, Open Source and indeed their own company can do no wrong because they champion the open source way. If you promise the moon, you better figure out a way to do it before you start.

I should probably warn folks at this point. There are a number of ideals and considerations at play here, so this response is a lot longer¹ than I would have liked.

Mantra, cha-cha-cha.

To be fair, it’s not just Joyent that sometimes speaks in open-source is alpha-and-omega tongues. They have genuinely achieved amazing results with a combination of Open Standards and Open Solaris — they have every reason to feel proud of their achievements. The Accelerators are also a fantastic example of the potential of Open Solaris mated with a good application platform.

Indeed Open products and services are no longer the domain of the geek, hacker or 30-year-old-virgin living in their mother’s basement. We are all increasingly exposed to a raft of technologies built on open source or open standards code that, well, anyone can have a hand in building — again Joyent have played their part in that, too.

But old rivalries between the apparently ‘evil’ closed barons and the open source ‘rebellion’ die hard. Voices of the rebellion sometimes take aim squarely at closed platforms that actually provide reasonably open, documented APIs. Sometimes that logic can fall a little flat, particularly when environments fail.

Conversely, closed platforms aren’t entirely free of sin either. Vista proves that, certainly at an OS level, it’s not always plain sailing.

I’ll take that, to go.

It’s understandable then, that a product isn’t rated solely on how open it is, or more portable, rather it’s how well the very same product stacks up under real world conditions and whether the results are the same as the description on the label. It can even come down to the simplest equation of how easy it is to use. If you claim something special — you’d better be prepared for scrutiny if it doesn’t deliver.

Of course, there are two sides to any coin. The flip side is that the average user often just doesn’t care. The question isn’t often “what can your platform do for me?” — even if it is a valid question — it’s “will my stuff run on your platform?”.

So, if an Open platform can do that which the user asks, then great² but the risk is that if Closed-Product-A works when Open-Product-B falls over, then Closed-Product-A is considered better by default, even if an Open product is a better fit. The internal mechanics or proprietary risk aren’t always relevant as a result.

Benchmarks.

We’re repeatedly told that Open Solaris is better than the competition, “you don’t want proprietary lock-in” and they aren’t as open as us. It can and paint Joyent badly, even if unintended. Because it is in the same vein as “Trust us, we know what we are doing”. It’s dictatorial and makes assumptions, rather than actually giving solid reason.

That assumption can lead to a situation where failures just aren’t learned, communication falters, users are blamed and an eventual disconnect between the developer, supplier and the end user occurs. People don’t remember successes half as much as failures, they are the great leveller and prior claims will often be the meter used to judge an outcome.

It will invite (occasionally heated) debate, quite obviously.

Open vs Better.

I wouldn’t comment at all, were they not an application and hosting services company I have interest in and respect for. Whilst I host with (mt) and use Amazon’s S3 for storage³, the Accelerator product has always struck me as a solid framework to really build a good platform on. The problem however, is that the learning curve is steep.

A complex (yet open) environment isn’t always as tempting or useful as a simple point and click (yet closed) alternative. In the same way, I want something simple that will still scale, without that learning curve. There is actually huge potential in Joyent bringing a point-and-click type model to the market.

At some point the stability, capabilities and ease-of-use of a service become vastly more important in comparison to whether or not said platform is Open⁴.

Communication.

It really is okay to believe strongly in your product and in your business — Joyent have a great deal to offer start-ups as has been mentioned — but it’s also okay to listen to prospective customers and users, even if they don’t agree with you on some points.

I question to understand. Will my stuff work on your gear? Will you be there when I falter? Will you communicate when you falter? Will you learn from past mistakes? Will you stand up to scrutiny and take the time to listen? Can I measure you on the claims you make?

They are all vital questions, with answers that speak with far more authority than any “trust us” line can ever achieve. And Joyent should expect to be measured by the very things they claim to achieve — indeed they hold their competitors accountable in the same manner. Ultimately then, it’s not a case of simply saying you are better and having that stick. Rather it is the actioning of those words that counts.

The preparedness to listen, the encouragement to respond and to have those questions taken on board is a promising first step in putting action ahead of word.

1. Believe me, I have been editing this on and off for hours. (↩)
2. Transparency of code and open ideals can result in many positives, but that is frequently at a development, rather than user level. (↩)
3. Media Temple serve me well, keep me informed and in particular, don’t make assumptions and listen to feedback. S3 just works, it’s not exactly portable, but it is reliable and simple to deploy. (↩)
4. By choosing to use Open Solaris, Joyent are actually to an extent, mimicking a form of “proprietary vendor lock-in” they champion against, simply due to Open Solaris’ relatively low footprint and the extra complexity of having to learn yet another environment. (↩)

If someone wandered into the woods and came back proclaiming he’d discovered gold tablets with a whole new gospel on them I’d be doubtful. If he said he was the only one who was allowed to see them I’d be skeptical. If he said they told him he was allowed more than one wife but it didn’t go the other way — only one husband for the ladies — I’d be laughing.

It never ever seems to strike those who go from house to house, attempting to subvert smart people into believing that their God is the “right” God, that we just aren’t that stupid. It’s like George Bush meets Leisure Suit Larry — all the wrong idiots in all the wrong places.

I’m all for communication between author and reader, but comments are the lowest possible denominator. More often than not, they bring out the absolute worst in people. via.

There are far better ways to converse, rather than a comment field that is just plain designed to invite commentary from everyone except those who actually have something real and wise and vibrant to add.

On a side note, Steven’s new minimalist design helps get the message across, without cruft.

The real takeaway is that when Apple does shit like this, it degrades Software Update and the extent to which people can unconditionally recommend it as a useful and convenient security precaution. Good security precautions don’t come with caveats.

Apple has dropped the ball here. And it is as simple as that. Automatic select-and-install of anything the user hasn’t specifically said “yes, please install application n, I approve that action by selection” by default is bad form. It’s wrong.

The Operating System in question is irrelevant, the principle is the same. Do not install shit I do not ask for, especially if you try and hide it as an “update”, purposefully or no. Apple’s software update hasn’t done this in the past (at least not on the Windows platform) and whilst it’s obvious Apple seeks to push their browser of choice, it should never be at the expense of user knowledge or by sneak attack.

The single best option is to revert the action back to what it had always been prior to the latest release of Safari. That is what the user expects. And thus that is what it should be — if I have not requested installation of the application, it remains un-installed.

And it left me thinking, what have I learned? And more importantly what have I learned that I could share. Of late, I’ve simplified some lessons-learned into two ideas I keep repeating to myself: Pay Attention and Give a Shit.

A great article that breaks down the idea of keeping it real and building importance.

For the longest time, I thought blogging was about you. That’s what everyone told me. “Blogging is a conversation”. Not my blog. My blog is a place where I share my thoughts. Where I write what I want to write. Not for you. For me.

When you understand that blogging is in many respects a gift given freely to others, you begin to understand that the finish line, fame and fortune really isn’t the goal.

Blogging isn’t conversation — with it’s propensity for short duration and expectation of feedback — it’s communication. There are simply no limits in what one can achieve when the journey becomes more important than the end.

Differentiating text links by color and/or decoration is just a fundamental approach. Your decisions for what color or what sort of decoration to use hinges on some important issues that reach beyond considerations of contrast and distinction. So these decisions cannot often be made arbitrarily.

Textual navigation’s entire function is to simplify access to content and to guide the reader to where they need to be. It should invite further participation and fit within the bounds of the design, getting from A to B and back again, without losing the reader in the process.

If your reader cannot cannot distinguish between content and interface, between link or highlight, or simply just how to proceed forward, they likely will not. A failure in anyone’s language, surely.

As previously mentioned I’ve got something cooking, so to speak. Andy has provided a timely reminder for this author of just how important placement and ease of navigation — something that is all-to-often sidelined — plays in overall site design.

I’ve been working on something. It’ll be live soon and it’s a whole new direction. More soon.

On a side-note — filed under the special-things-that-turn-one-homicidal category — something was slightly h0rked after a recent hosting upgrade. I think I’ve nailed it now. Mostly.

“Uh, we had a slight weapons malfunction, but uh… everything’s perfectly all right now. We’re fine. We’re all fine here now, thank you. How are you?”

Worth mentioning at this point, is my natural hatred when it comes to moving Wordpress — the database is very fragile and entirely prone to crash. It’s worse when months of backups all share the same flaw that was exposed during the move and db server upgrade. Upshot?

Always have a plan D, for when A and B and C all crash and burn.