<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/atom2xhtml.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
  <title xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">Case Topics: IT</title>
  <id xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">http://topics.case.edu/IT</id>
  <category term="IT" label="IT" />
  <link xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="alternate" href="http://topics.case.edu/IT" type="text/html"/>
  <updated xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">2009-11-23T05:54:39Z</updated>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Competing with the Internet (Don't)</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2009/04/29/competing_with_the_internet_dont"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2009/04/29/competing_with_the_internet_dont</id>
    <published>2009-04-29T17:59:59Z</published>
    <updated>2009-04-29T18:02:55Z</updated>
    <category term="cloud computing" label="cloud computing"/>
    <category term="googleapps" label="googleapps"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="web 2.0" label="web 2.0"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>
<a title="Official Google Enterprise Blog: What we talk about when we talk about cloud computing" href="http://googleenterprise.blogspot.com/2009/04/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about.html">What we [Google] talk about when we talk about cloud computing</a>
</p>
<p>
<a title="Wikipedia:Too long; didn't read - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Too_long;_didn%27t_read">tl;dr</a> version: 
<strong>Don't compete against the Internet</strong> or 
<strong>Why your ERP application was legacy the day it came online</strong>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>IT systems are typically slow to evolve. [Pre-packaged software] only receive major feature enhancements every 2-3 years, and in the meantime they have to endure the monthly patch cycle and painful system-wide upgrades… [Google] can deliver innovation quickly without IT admins needing to manage upgrades… [Google Apps] delivered more than 60 new features over the last year…</p>
<p>The era of delayed gratification is over â€“ the Internet allows innovations to be delivered as a constant flow… This makes major upgrades a thing of the past…</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Top 10 IT Trends for Higher Education in 2009</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2008/12/14/top_10_it_trends_for_higher_education_in_2009"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick/2008/12/14/top_10_it_trends_for_higher_education_in_2009</id>
    <published>2008-12-14T17:08:58Z</published>
    <updated>2008-12-15T16:34:57Z</updated>
    <category term="Education" label="Education"/>
    <category term="Higher" label="Higher"/>
    <category term="IT" label="IT"/>
    <category term="Trends" label="Trends"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">What happens when tough economic times combine with fatigue across the campus community hyping the latest 'killer app', and the growing intolerance of disruptions to services occasioned by security-related activities. I think the intersection of these three realities represent the most important challenges for IT Leadership on the campus in 2009. The truth is that we've not seen 3 years of negative economic growth since the birth of the Internet. We are one year into the global recession and the crystal-ball gazing efforts underway on most campuses are not producing rosy scenarios. CIO leaders at most universities are closing in on 'core' operations as they look for options for cost cutting requirements after more than 5 years of marginal growth. CIOs are portfolio managers. Like their counterparts, CIO portfolio management is really about combining requirements for operational excellence, customer service, and selective innovation (r&amp;d) activity. In a three-year secular downturn, there are going to be tough decisions ahead to keep strong performance in all three core activities outlined above. For many university technology leaders the emergence over the past couple of years of web 2.0 technologies represented a confluence of maturing underlying technologies combined with the rise of what we asserted was the first really promising set of mass collaboration tools. Here we were sitting on the precipice of the long promised 'transformational' potential of technology to the education enterprise and then the economy tanks. In reality, the economic downturn is only one reason that the campus community is less enamored with web 2.0 tools than most of us technologists. For many across the university the rate of change in introducing ever more exciting technologies has left them, to put it diplomatically, breathless. In reality, the hype over web 2.0 is only the most recent instantiation of the long held view that we technologists are amusing ourselves and the rest of the campus to death, forever one gadget or applet away from the ultimate breakthrough. Finally, whether it is the latest facebook virus, botnets instigated from far flung corners of the world, or the now predictable 'urgent' security fixes from our favorite vendors, there is a real sense across the campus that the 'bad guys' are winning the war. What was simply a nuisance that could be solved with a bit of end-user education and throwing some hardware at the problem has emerged into our own full fledged war on the forces of evil on the Internet. Like recent international conflicts, most on the university campus are ready to conclude that we have neither a strategy for winning this war nor an exit strategy. Combined, economic blues, end-user fatigue, and a growing sense of collective vulnerability to the forces who would seek to harm us has the campus technology community facing its biggest set of challenges in 25 years. Against that sobering backdrop, here are my top 10 IT trends for higher education for the year ahead, 2009. 
<b>1. To The Cloud and Beyond</b>. Watch for significant moves in the university space going well beyond cloud email services. I expect we'll see the emergence of shared storage utilities and a range of 'web services' in 2009 following industry trends, campus economic pressure, and ecological considerations. While the same resistance points will find their way into campus deliberations, resistance is too expensive, distracts us from where we can bring real value, and ultimately futile. But for the most regulated storage requirements, there really is no alternative. 
<b>2. The Consumer Reigns Supreme</b>. There has been an academic debate in most large organizations for 5 years about how we were going to manage the growing presence of consumer technologies within our enterprises. No more. The tsunami is here. Those of us still debating the merits of attending to Facebook, iTouch/iPhone, streaming media, massive player online gaming, mashups, and virtual reality platforms are staring at the wall of this tidal wave of consumer technologies. New trends in 2009 will likely include the first college-centered breakthroughs for mobile computing after mass notification. Watch for location-based technologies and presence technologies embedded in mobile smart phones and other devices (like wi-fi enabled iTouch) to lead to the first set of scalable campus applets. 
<b>3. Streaming Media for Education Goes Mainstream</b>. Students expect it. Teachers accept it. Network engineers will have to live with it. Academic technologists need to figure out how to scale it. In the next 12 months, I think YouTube, iTunes U, and the plethora of campus-based services for academic streaming media are going to hit main street. Economics plus assessment data now provide compelling evidence that student success is positively associated with the integration of streaming media into the capture and review of traditional learning models of instructor-centered delivery. In the next year I expect that we will see significant acceleration of efforts associated with video/speech to text technologies to provide real time transcripts for purposes of enhanced search capabilities. I also expect that large repositories of meta-tagged and transcoded academic assets (classes, recitations, seminars etc ...) will begin to emerge allowing for federated searches and mashing up of learning content by students and faculty alike. 
<b>4. SecondLife Goes Back to School</b>. Initial exuberance and hype led to hundreds of universities experimenting with 3D Virtual Worlds three years ago. The user-generated universe requires new pedagogy and curriculum considerations. Academic technologists and the education community has learned a lot over the past several years. Look for new functionality and education-centered technology capabilities over the next year. The net result should be an exciting and provocative set of new collaborative capabilities to help enable more campus control and flexible tools for learning. Dust off your avatar and get ready for one of the most important collaborative learning platforms to make inroads in the year ahead. 
<b>5. e-Book Readers Disrupt the College Text Book Marketplace</b>. Early predictions of the demise of the college text book market in 2008 were highly exaggerated. Sony and Amazon (among others) are in e-Book Reader space for the long haul. Early in 2009, expect to see new hardware form factors reflecting a more mature and robust technology. More important, I think we'll see pilot activity among the Book publishers and the e-book publishing industry to work with the campus to create relevant tools for learning embedded in their core technologies. 
<b>6. The IT Help Desk Becomes An Enterprise Service Desk</b> . Long underfunded and staffed with underpaid students I think we are going to hit an inflection point in the IT Help Desk world. Customer service matters. Truth is that with a few important notable exceptions most campus Help Desks are not our strongest service lines. An emergent group of higher-education focused companies have entered this space and are offering a compelling value proposition for many campuses. On some campuses, the Berlin wall between IT Help Desks and Facilities and other customer service organizations are also coming down. The trend line is about to hit a take-off point. I think 2009 may well be the year. 
<b>7. Course Management Systems are Dead! Long Live Course Management Systems!</b> Proprietary course management systems are heading for a brick wall. The combination of economic pressures combined with saturated markets and the maturing stage of the life cycle of these once innovative platforms means that 2009 may well be the year of change or a year of serious planning for change. Relatively inexpensive and feature-comparable open source alternatives combined with some now learned experience in the process of transition from closed to open systems for the inventory of repeating courses makes real change in this once bedrock of education technology a growing possibility. As product managers and management view these trend lines, I think we might see incumbent players make a valiant effort to re-invent themselves before the market drops out from underneath them. Look for the number of major campuses moving (or making serious threats to move) from closed systems to climb in the year ahead. 
<b>8. ERP? What's That?</b> No, I don't think the large enterprise resource planning systems that undergird our major administrative systems are going to fall off the face of the earth like antiquated dinosaurs in the next 12 months. I do think that ERP upgrades which many campuses are now facing, planning, and staging are going to need to be re-positioned. At a minimum, I think we will see decisions made to delay major upgrades for 18-24 months. It is also possible that pressure will grow in this next year on the duopoly of these integrated systems providers to re-open their maintenance and other fee schedules in exchange for continuing multi-year commitments from the campus community. We will also see new models mature in the hosting of ERP services both as shared services among the campus community and as a commercial service offering. For these glacially-moving systems, change is happening. It's just hard some times to see the rate of change until you're looking in the rear view mirror 10 years from now. 
<b>9. In God We Trust -- Everyone Else Bring Data</b>. Decision support software and data warehousing tools have been available on campus for well over a decade. While cultures of evidence are not well rooted in the decision making on many University campuses, the growing pressures for better decision making in the context of budget pressures is compelling the campus to make better decisions. The small priesthood of campus analysts with skills to support decision making have more job security than most. At the same time, look for new reporting tools and growing expectations that metrics, scorecards, and data analytics will be used to drive tough decision making on campus. 
<b>10. Smile, Interactive High Definition Video Conferencing</b> moves from the Board Room to the Research Lab and the Lecture Hall. Facing budget pressures and public pressure to go green, corporations around the world are investing in next generation video conferencing. Moving operating dollars into infrastructure investments in this collaboration platform technology has led to significant reductions in travel costs, better space utilization, and a growing conscientiousness about carbon footprints. As businesses continues to look for capabilities to support global operations video conferencing has become a daily part of many companies. The logic facing corporations now confront the University community. Over the past 18 months some public universities have been mandated to reduce their carbon footprints. Most everyone else is facing growing operating pressures pinching travel and other budget lines. New students care about pro-active green initiatives as part of their University experience. Over the next 12 months look for double digit growth in campus adoption of next generation video conferencing tools, including integrated collaboration technologies. One more trend for good measure. Substitute this one if you disagree vehemently with any of the other items above. 
<b>11. The campus data center goes under the scope</b> . Most every campus technology leader has been zinged for disaster recovery and business continuity planning. Add to this that there is exponential demand among the research community for computational research space to support high performance computing. The facilities community is under growing pressure to distribute the costs of power consumption on campus. Data centers consume disproportionate amounts of space, cooling, and power. Finally, growing green is a campus imperative leading to potential operating savings through virtualization, data center optimization, and new greener strategies. Board audit committees and senior management are going to hold technology management accountable for robust data center operations in a highly constrained budget environment. I don't know about you but my holiday gift wish list includes an extra bottle of Tylenol three, a Teflon flak jacket, and a hope that structured innovation remains part of the campus IT portfolio. Against multiple pressures, focus on structured innovation remains our best hope of remaining central to the University's strategic mission and activity. Lev Gonick Case Western Reserve University Cleveland, OH December 15, 2008</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Lev Gonick</name>
      <email>lev.gonick@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/lev.gonick</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Can I Link to It?</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2007/12/29/can_i_link_to_it"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2007/12/29/can_i_link_to_it</id>
    <published>2007-12-29T18:17:23Z</published>
    <updated>2008-01-23T23:58:38Z</updated>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="Web Services" label="Web Services"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="rest" label="rest"/>
    <category term="web" label="web"/>
    <category term="web 2.0" label="web 2.0"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a title="Derivadow.com" href="http://derivadow.com/">Tom Scott</a>, of the 
<a title="BBC - bbc.co.uk homepage - Home of the BBC on the Internet" href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/">BBC</a>, comments on 
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/radiolabs/2007/12/show_your_workings.shtml">Jamieâ€™s comments</a> about Jamie's work on the design of 
<a href="http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/">BBCâ€™s /programmes service</a> in his post 
<a title="Web design 2.0 - itâ€™s all about the resource and its URL ï¿½ Derivadow.com" href="http://derivadow.com/2007/12/28/web-design-20-its-all-about-the-resource-and-its-url/">Web design 2.0 - itâ€™s all about the resource and its URL</a>. It touches on something I constantly hammer on: 
<strong>Everything important should have a URL</strong> Put another way: 
<strong>Can I link to it?</strong> That's the way I phrase it in meetings when people say something like &quot;I am-developing/have-developed web blah-blah-blah so-on-and-so-forth.&quot; The next thing out of my mouth is &quot;
<em>can I link to it?</em>&quot; And I don't mean link to a page that shows it. I mean 
<em>directly</em> link to the &quot;web thing&quot; (i.e. &quot;resource&quot;; i.e. &quot;data&quot;) that was created. Sure, it's a blanket statement that ignores nuances and such (I don't even want to get into ETags with the people). I just find that it is a useful question for an &quot;inside the Enterprise&quot; environment in trying to improve IT architecture — it's catchy; it's to the point; and it can be (in general) easily comprehendible by people. (By the way, the web design at 
<a href="http://derivadow.com/">derivadow.com</a> (which, according to the site's 
<a title="Colophon ï¿½ Derivadow.com" href="http://derivadow.com/colophon/">colophon</a> is based on the &quot;
<em>ChaosTheory</em>&quot; Wordpress theme) looks a lot like 
<a href="http://subtraction.com">Khio Vinh's subtraction.com</a>.)</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>RealPlayer 11 Beta</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/stm/2007/09/10/realplayer_11_beta"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/stm/2007/09/10/realplayer_11_beta</id>
    <published>2007-09-10T14:10:41Z</published>
    <updated>2007-09-10T14:49:41Z</updated>
    <category term="IT" label="IT"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I had to install Realplayer 11 Beta on some older machines to be imaged, and it was exhibiting some peculiar behavior. The executable forked (or whatever the windows equivalent might be) and was running two instances of itself. The one instance was spiking at around 97% to 100% CPU usage, and the other one was using what was left. I left the install run for about 30 minutes and it had only made it to 60% completion. Here is where it gets really weird... By accident I drug the task manager over the installer window so that it covered the picture area where the installer was trying to show animations or something. At this point the second instance of the installer process jumped up to around 30% CPU usage and the install finished in a couple minutes. I was doing it on two machines at the same time so I did the same thing to the other one. The second machine was just starting the install (around 10% done or so) but it also reacted the same way. When I drug the task manager over the animation area it began using more CPU on the second process and finished installing in a couple minutes. I'm guessing maybe this has something to do with DirectX? Maybe placing one window over the other meant RP could not access that part of video memory, or meant it returned false for some &quot;is visible&quot; type of boolean test? I had installed RealPlayer 11 Beta on a couple newer machine last week and it did not do this... Any thoughts are welcome.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Sean Maxwell</name>
      <email>sean.maxwell@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/stm</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>History of ITS's Internal Wiki</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/06/history_of_its_internal_wiki"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/06/history_of_its_internal_wiki</id>
    <published>2006-11-06T18:23:13Z</published>
    <updated>2006-11-06T20:47:48Z</updated>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="case" label="case"/>
    <category term="case western" label="case western"/>
    <category term="case western reserve university" label="case western reserve university"/>
    <category term="collaboration" label="collaboration"/>
    <category term="documentation" label="documentation"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="wiki" label="wiki"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I was trying to figure out how long we, here in 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/ITS">ITS</a>, have been using an internal wiki to document &quot;things.&quot; After hunting around the old filesystems, I found one of the original installs of 
<a href="http://www.kwiki.org">Kwiki</a> dating back to July 20th, 2004. I came from 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/Weatherhead">Weatherhead</a> to 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/ITS">ITS</a> in February of 2003, and I remember setting up the wiki fairly quickly between helping get the new 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/Email">Email</a> system launched and redesigning our internal Identity Management system (I used the wiki to document the redesign). The July 2004 date didn't seem early enough. The July 20th, 2004 number coincides closely with the Kwiki 
<code>.3x</code> release according to 
<a title="" href="http://search.cpan.org/src/INGY/Kwiki-0.38/Changes">Kwiki's changelog</a>, but I remember using the 
<code>.1x</code> version (when it was 
<code>CGI::Kwiki</code>) for quite a while before leaping to the completely rewritten codebase of the 
<code>.3x</code> series. There's no history of the 
<code>.1x</code> versions on the 
<a href="http://www.kwiki.org">Kwiki website</a> or the 
<a title="Ingy dot Net : Kwiki - search.cpan.org" href="http://search.cpan.org/dist/Kwiki/">Kwiki CPAN page</a>. The 
<a href="http://archive.org">Wayback machine</a> helped me nail it down to a closer date because I remember doing the upgrade from 
<code>.17</code> to 
<code>.18</code>. 
<code>.17</code> was released on June 10th, 2003 according to this 
<a title="The Official Kwiki Web Site: KwikiKwiki" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20030618145437/http://www.kwiki.org/">wayback page</a>. 
<code>.18</code> was released on September 10th, 2003 according to 
<a title="The Official Kwiki Web Site: KwikiKwiki" href="http://web.archive.org/web/20031023092457/http://www.kwiki.org/">this wayback page</a>. So I'm going to estimate that the internal wiki was first in use circa July of 2003. Since that time, we've switched to 
<a title="DokuWiki [splitbrain.org]" href="http://www.splitbrain.org/projects/dokuwiki">DokuWiki</a>.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Two Programmers</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/03/two_programmers"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/03/two_programmers</id>
    <published>2006-11-03T16:41:01Z</published>
    <updated>2006-11-03T16:40:11Z</updated>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="Programming" label="Programming"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="joke" label="joke"/>
    <category term="linkblog" label="linkblog"/>
    <category term="project management" label="project management"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a title="The Parable of the Two Programmers" href="http://www.csd.uwo.ca/staff/magi/personal/humour/Computer_Audience/The%20Parable%20of%20the%20Two%20Programmers.html">The Parable of the Two Programmers</a> An oldie but goodie. You have to read it through to the end.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>SOA</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/02/soa"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/11/02/soa</id>
    <published>2006-11-02T07:13:43Z</published>
    <updated>2006-11-02T07:15:05Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="Web Services" label="Web Services"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="linkblog" label="linkblog"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<a title="SOA Facts" href="http://soafacts.com/">SOA can write and compile itself</a>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Using &quot;Google Apps for Education&quot; at Case Western</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/30/using_google_apps_for_education_at_case_western"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/30/using_google_apps_for_education_at_case_western</id>
    <published>2006-08-30T23:11:13Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-30T23:20:22Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="Federated Identity" label="Federated Identity"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="google" label="google"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="single sign on" label="single sign on"/>
    <category term="sso" label="sso"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I may be about to shock you. You see, if you know me, you would think that 
<a title="Google Apps for Education" href="https://www.google.com/a/edu/">Google Apps for Education</a> is something I would be 
<em>all about</em>. I would be wearing a T-shirt reading, carrying a sign saying, and chanting &quot;
<strong>We Should be Using Google Apps for Education</strong>.&quot; I'm not. And I don't think we should. I'll try to explain. There are several ways this could be done. One way is to convert all the Case accounts to Google accounts. Another way is to just convert a section of accounts to Google accounts (like &quot;students,&quot; for example). Yet another way is to have everyone maintain two accounts.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Email Users' Storage Stats</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/18/email_users_storage_stats"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/18/email_users_storage_stats</id>
    <published>2006-08-18T19:37:07Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-18T19:57:13Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="statistics" label="statistics"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Earlier, I broke down some 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role">stats on email usage broken down by role</a> (e.g. student, staff, faculty). Since then, we've 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: At the Bottom of Webmail" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/07/20/webmail_inbox_stats">bumped up the email quota</a> from 100MB to 200MB for faculty, students, and staff. We did that about a month ago. Now, with the start of the semsester coming, I thought I would generate a baseline histogram of where we stand. Here it is: 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/18/members-mail-usage.gif">
<img alt="members-mail-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/18/members-mail-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="391"/>
</a> At the end of the semester (and maybe once more in the middle of it), I plan on breaking down these stats again. 
<strong>&lt;Update&gt;</strong> In the future, I may want to do comparative analysis with this data. Rather than trust me to not lose it on my hard drive, I'll just link to it from here. (Gonna do this on the earlier entry, too.) 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/18/member-mail-usage.csv">member-mail-usage.csv</a> 
<strong>&lt;/Update&gt;</strong></div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>WWW Issuing 301s for www.cwru.edu</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/05/www_redirects"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/08/05/www_redirects</id>
    <published>2006-08-05T20:53:53Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-05T20:59:57Z</updated>
    <category term="HTTP" label="HTTP"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="case" label="case"/>
    <category term="case western" label="case western"/>
    <category term="case western reserve university" label="case western reserve university"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="web" label="web"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>I've long lamented the fact that 
<a href="http://www.case.edu">WWW</a> wasn't able to do 
<code>301</code> redirects for HTTP requests from 
<code>www.
<strong>cwru</strong>.edu/
<em>whatever</em></code> to 
<code>www.
<strong>case</strong>.edu/
<em>whatever</em></code>. 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: What Do People Call " case="" western="" reserve="" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/05/10/what_do_people_call_case_western_reserve_university">Quoting myself</a>:</p>
<blockquote>Heck, we're not even the first hit on a 
<a title="case - Google Search" href="http://www.google.com/search?q=case">search on &quot;case&quot;</a>. We are the #2 hit listed as &quot;http://www.
<strong>cwru</strong>.edu&quot; ← oh the irony of running a web server on WWW that can't do simple 
<code>301</code>s.</blockquote>
<p>You may think that I am just being nit-picky because I have to be 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: I Must Be the Most Demanding User in the World" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2005/02/23/demanding_user">the most demanding user in the world</a>, but it's actually a pretty big deal. Search results and the ability to find information is a key ingredient of information architecture success.</p>
<p>Well, I have good news. I got an email last Friday from the Webmaster of WWW:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Jeremy,</p>
<p>Just wanted to let you know that I put in a redirect on the Case webserver. Any requests for *.cwru.edu result in a 301 redirect to *.case.edu.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
<strong>Woohoo!</strong> Our search results will finally gain some sanity. Below, I've taken screenshots exemplifying some of the stupidity of our current search results. Over the coming week, the search bots that index our site will take into account the 
<code>301</code>s, and a search over the 
<code>www.cwru.edu</code> domain will return the exact same hits as a search over the 
<code>www.case.edu</code> domain. In addition, the entire existence of a machine called 
<code>www.cwru.edu</code> will disappear and will never again appear as a result of a search.</p>
<div style="width: 575px; border: solid 1px white;">
<p style="width: 260px; float: right; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.case.edu+apply">Search for &quot;apply&quot; on www.case.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20apply.png">
<img alt="case search results for apply.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20apply-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
<p style="width: 260px; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.cwru.edu+apply">Search for &quot;apply&quot; on www.cwru.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20apply.png">
<img alt="cwru search results for apply.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20apply-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
</div>
<div style="width: 575px; border: solid 1px white;">
<p style="width: 260px; float: right; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.case.edu+email+settings">Search for &quot;email settings&quot; on www.case.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings.png">
<img alt="case search results for email settings.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
<p style="width: 260px; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.cwru.edu+email+settings">Search for &quot;email settings&quot; on www.cwru.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings.png">
<img alt="cwru search results for email settings.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20email%20settings-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
</div>
<div style="width: 575px; border: solid 1px white;">
<p style="width: 260px; float: right; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.case.edu+enrollment">Search for &quot;enrollment&quot; on www.case.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment.png">
<img alt="case search results for enrollment.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/case%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
<p style="width: 260px; border: solid 1px white;">
<a href="http://www.google.com/search?q=site%3Awww.cwru.edu+enrollment">Search for &quot;enrollment&quot; on www.cwru.edu</a>
<br/>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment.png">
<img alt="cwru search results for enrollment.png" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/08/05/cwru%20search%20results%20for%20enrollment-thumb.png" width="250" height="165"/>
</a>
</p>
</div>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Reading</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/31/reading"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/31/reading</id>
    <published>2006-07-31T18:37:41Z</published>
    <updated>2006-07-31T18:45:25Z</updated>
    <category term="collaboration" label="collaboration"/>
    <category term="google" label="google"/>
    <category term="groupware" label="groupware"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="open source" label="open source"/>
    <category term="project management" label="project management"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>Here's another selection of articles I've read and planned to blog about but couldn't muster up the gumption to actually write an entry. So instead, I'm just going to link to them with quotes.</p>
<p>
<a title="The IT manager's guide to social computing | The Register" href="http://www.theregister.com/2006/07/21/it_managers_guide_to_social_computing/">The IT manager's guide to social computing</a>:</p>
<blockquote>Sounds like knowledge management doesn't it? Well, it's not. There's none of the coercive aspects of that particular discipline. And, before you ask, it's much more free-form and less centrally-directed than groupware. In fact, social computing is a curious mix of top-down initiation and bottom-up implementation... The main software elements are wikis, blogs, RSS and tags. Other, more traditional elements like forums, directories and discussion boards may form part of the mix. Instant messaging and email are more communication channels, still used but not inherently social.</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="Living out loud: Learning from Google's internal information management processes | urlgreyhot" href="http://urlgreyhot.com/personal/weblog/living_out_loud_learning_from_googles_internal_information_management_processes">Living out loud: Learning from Google's internal information management processes</a>:</p>
<blockquote>[H]ow Google uses a simple system that manages project information using relatively unstructured email as the interface. The system mails employees every week asking what they worked on the week prior and what they plan to work on during the current week. The response is parsed, fed and indexed into a searchable system that is open to the enterprise so that anyone else can track other employees projects that they are interested in. They call it &quot;living out loud&quot;.</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="Bob Sutton: Strong Opinions, Weakly Held" href="http://bobsutton.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/07/strong_opinions.html">Strong Opinions, Weakly Held</a>
</p>
<p>
<a title="Guardian Unlimited Technology | Technology | What is the 1% rule?" href="http://technology.guardian.co.uk/weekly/story/0,,1823959,00.html">What is the 1% rule?</a>
</p>
<blockquote>It's an emerging rule of thumb that suggests that if you get a group of 100 people online then one will create content, 10 will &quot;interact&quot; with it (commenting or offering improvements) and the other 89 will just view it.</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="ï¿½ Does open source usage free your budget up for the best talent? | Between the Lines | ZDNet.com" href="http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=3391">Does open source usage free your budget up for the best talent?</a>
</p>
<blockquote>
<p>It's no secret these days (just look at the gazillions of studies) that it's not necessarily cheaper to run a business with open source software than it is to run &quot;closed-source&quot; commercial software. The actual costs just show up in different places. But what rarely gets explored are the trade-offs that are made when your fixed budget is spent in different places</p>
<p>...</p>
<p>What happens with open source is you actually spend the same amount of money, but you don't have lock-in and you pay for really good people to run it. And so you still end up paying. But you just pay in a different place. And I think it's a much more sustainable model...</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>At the Bottom of Webmail</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/20/webmail_inbox_stats"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/20/webmail_inbox_stats</id>
    <published>2006-07-20T18:23:19Z</published>
    <updated>2006-07-20T18:22:31Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="linkblog" label="linkblog"/>
    <category term="statistics" label="statistics"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">If you login to 
<a href="http://mail.case.edu">Webmail</a> and you scroll to the very bottom of the page (or in a fat client, right click and get &quot;properties&quot; or something of your Inbox), you should notice something has changed. If everything goes as planned, it should change again, too.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>&quot;Enterprise 2.0&quot; *Should* be Better Than &quot;Web 2.0&quot;</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/06/enterprise_20_should_be_better_than_web_20"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/07/06/enterprise_20_should_be_better_than_web_20</id>
    <published>2006-07-06T19:05:01Z</published>
    <updated>2006-07-06T19:18:16Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="knowledge management" label="knowledge management"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">So, I'm back from 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: On Vacation" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/23/on_vacation">vacation</a> and have managed to catch up on all of my email. There's been some more interesting discussions happening about bring &quot;Web 2.0&quot; concepts into the &quot;
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: The Term 'Enterprise' and How It is Applied to Software â€” Technical or Social?" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2005/08/10/enterprise_software">Enterprise</a>&quot; (previously blogged about in my entry 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: What I Read Over the Weekend: Bringing " web="" concepts="" to="" the="Enterprise&quot;&quot;" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/04/17/web_20_for_the_enterprise">Bringing &quot;Web 2.0&quot; Concepts to the &quot;Enterprise&quot;</a>). 
<a title="Andrew McAfee" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/">Andrew McAfee</a>, Associate Professor at the 
<a title="Harvard Business School" href="http://www.hbs.edu/">Harvard Business School</a>, has an excellent post 
<a title="Andrew McAfee: Raising the Least Common Denominator" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/index.php/faculty_amcafee_v3/raising_the_least_common_denominator/">Raising the Least Common Denominator</a>:
<blockquote>And one of the main themes of this blog is that this kind of productive collaboration should be easier within Intranets than across the Internet. Enterprise 2.0, in other words, should be at least as powerful as Web 2.0. The informal and formal leaders of a company have an arsenal of tools at their disposal to shape both the processes of collaboration and their outcomes. If the digital collaboration platform turns into a shouting match or a random collection of junk they really have no one to blame but themselves.</blockquote>If 
<a title="Case Western Reserve University" href="http://www.case.edu/">we're</a> indicative of many &quot;Enterprises,&quot; the biggest problem is the notion of &quot;collaboration.&quot; Most people relate collaboration to email, Word documents, and meetings. So, when thinking of ways to 
<em>improve</em> &quot;collaboration,&quot; the natural thought is to just try and create 
<strong>email++</strong>, 
<strong>Word++</strong>, and 
<strong>meetings++</strong>. This is how you end up spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on Web 1.0-style, monolithic collaboration &quot;suites&quot; like 
<a title="Oracle Collaboration Suite" href="http://www.oracle.com/collabsuite/index.html">Oracle Collaboration Suite</a> instead of turning to disruptive technologies that the Internet has already shown scale to the thousands and 
<em>facilitate</em> collaboration instead of just wrapping things up in complicated workflows and humdrum, clunky interfaces. There's a reason 
<a title="Main Page - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page">Wikipedia</a> doesn't run on 
<a title="Better together: Microsoft Dynamics GP, Microsoft Office a powerful pair" href="http://www.microsoft.com/dynamics/gp/product/office_integration.mspx">Microsoft Dynamics</a> or 
<a title="Oracle Collaboration Suite" href="http://www.oracle.com/collabsuite/index.html">Oracle Collaboration Suite</a>. To get Enterprises to move to &quot;Enterprise 2.0&quot; is a huge shift in thinking. It's not 
<strong>email++</strong>; it is something entirely different. It's 
<em>not</em> monolithic software suites that enhance collaboration; rather, it is systems like 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Top 3 Most Wanted Services From ITS: #2) Wiki Farm" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/02/01/three_wanted_its_services_wiki_farm">wiki farms</a> and 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Announcing the iTunes@Case Project" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/03/20/case_itunes">iTunes</a> that enhance collaboration. Systems that get better and better the more people use them — emergent systems that enable the Read/Write web. 
<a title="JP Rangaswami" href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/about-me/">JP Rangaswami</a> has a good follow-up post to Andrew McAfee's piece in 
<a title="Confused Of Calcutta :: Blog Archive :: Four Pillars: Does Social Software help Enterprises Dumb Down?" href="http://confusedofcalcutta.com/2006/07/04/four-pillars-does-social-software-help-enterprises-dumb-down/">Does Social Software help Enterprises Dumb Down?</a> where he describes &quot;enterprise immune systems.&quot; I just thought the term was great in describing the avoidance of &quot;Web 2.0&quot; style collaboration tools in many enterprises. The battle to bring &quot;Web 2.0&quot; style, emergent Read/Write properties, user-centric tools/systems to the enterprise isn't just evangelizing their properties. What is needed is a cultural shift to stop thinking about collaboration in terms of 
<strong>email++</strong> and 
<strong>meeting++</strong>.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Answering Comments about Mail Statistics</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/14/answering_comments_about_mail_statistics"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/14/answering_comments_about_mail_statistics</id>
    <published>2006-06-14T23:41:29Z</published>
    <updated>2006-06-14T23:43:00Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Responding to the two comments in 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role">Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role</a>. 
<a title="Gregory Szorc's blog - Rambling on: and nowâ€™s the time; the time is now" href="http://blog.case.edu/gps10/">Gregory Szorc</a> 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role#19551">asks</a>:
<blockquote>Many universities actually use squirrelmail as their official web client. Why doesn't Case?</blockquote>Soon after we had the new mail system up and running (I had joined 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/ITS">ITS</a> from 
<a href="http://wiki.case.edu/Weatherhead">Weatherhead</a> just 
<em>at</em> that point – at the tail end of the big mail/LDAP/calendar project), I quickly became displeased with our 
<a href="http://mail.case.edu">webmail</a> (this was even before 
<a href="http://gmail.com">GMail</a>). I had demonstrated an installation of 
<a title="SquirrelMail - Webmail for Nuts!" href="http://www.squirrelmail.org/">SquirrelMail</a> and 
<a title="IMP Webmail Client" href="http://www.horde.org/imp/">IMP</a> running and working atop our IMAP server. But the idea didn't get traction at the time. The counter-argument most often heard involved having to bring the Helpdesk on board so that they could adequately troubleshoot yet-another-email-webclient, and that that would take too much time and wasn't worth it. Now, in this post-GMail-world, the displeasures of our webmail interface are more apparent. Especially when you look at the 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/index.html">statistics</a>: 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/data/pop-good.html">Average Active POP Connections</a>: 300 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/data/imap-good.html">Average Active IMAP Connections</a>: 140 
<a title="ITS" href="http://tisstats.case.edu/net/netstats/mrtgmailservers.new/data/webmail-good.html">Average Active Webmail Connections</a>: 180 No doubt, a majority of the webmail connections are students. To students, having grown up on Yahoo! and Hotmail, email 
<strong>is</strong> webmail. And, don't forget, this is the summer. The webmail connection rate is far higher during the fall and spring semesters. I do bring it up... a lot. Our webmail is below par. People agree with me. They nod their heads. But I can't get people to greenlight a project around setting up an IMP, Squirrelmail, or Roundcude; running it without helpdesk support as a Beta; and then gather feedback from our users and decide where to go from there. If I could get someone to greenlight it, I would do it. 
<a title="Aaron thinks here." href="http://blog.case.edu/aaron.shaffer/">Aaron Shaffer</a> 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role#19636">remarks</a>:
<blockquote>My interpretation of the low forwarding numbers is that students use Case webmail for receiving mail but not sending</blockquote>For students and staff, I actually think those forwarding numbers are quite high. We've got over 10,000 &quot;students.&quot; So, ~10% of that means that there are around 1000 students who have forwarded their email to gmail. And, remember, this is only gmail. I didn't count AOL, Hotmail, or Yahoo! (or anywhere else). I just wanted a representative slice.
<blockquote>Is there any chance you can get statistics on the ratio of messages sent to messages received at case.edu?</blockquote>Not broken down like this.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Email Box Storage Stats Broken Down by Role</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/13/email_box_storage_stats_broken_down_by_role</id>
    <published>2006-06-13T18:11:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-08-18T20:01:17Z</updated>
    <category term="Email Services" label="Email Services"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="statistics" label="statistics"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I'm kinda of a statistics nut. I like breaking stuff down into cold, hard, unforgiving numbers. As a corollary to being a slight stats nut, I am also 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: A Note About Web Server Statistics" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2005/10/12/a_note_about_web_server_statistics">very wary</a> of 
<em>any</em> and 
<strong>all</strong> statistics (I'm sure you've heard the quote before.... &quot;lies, damned lies...&quot;) Just look at the 
<a title="ITS Dashboard" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph">ITS Dashboard</a>. There's a lot of meaningless statistics in there that could be used to &quot;justify&quot; a lot of different perceptions of their &quot;meanings&quot; (i.e. incorrect trending). In addition to the meaningless stats, there are some in there that are downright misleading. But for all you people that like stats and for some reason like to look at pretty graphs, I recently took a little bit of time and poured over the mail server collecting some numbers. The numbers I was looking for are:
<ul>
<li>How much email storage (in megabytes) do our typical users use?</li>
<li>What about faculty — how much do they use?</li>
<li>What about students?</li>
<li>Staff?</li>
</ul>Well, here are the numbers (sorry about the poor quality of the graphics (click through on the picture to see the larger images), I used a small perl script to gather the numbers but crunched them and produced the charts in Excel): 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/students-mail-usage.gif">
<img alt="students-mail-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/students-mail-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="393"/>
</a> 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/staff-email-usage.gif">
<img alt="staff-email-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/staff-email-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="393"/>
</a> 
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/faculty-email-usage.gif">
<img alt="faculty-email-usage.gif" src="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/faculty-email-usage-thumb.gif" width="600" height="393"/>
</a> In addition to that numerical goodness, I created some fun ITS Dashboard stats tracking the number of persons (broken down by roles again) forwarding their Case email to 
<a href="http://gmail.com" title="Google Mail">GMail</a>:
<ul>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - students" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=225">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - students</a>
</li>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - staff" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=226">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - staff</a>
</li>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - faculty" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=227">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - faculty</a>
</li>
<li>
<a title="ITS Dashboard : Email accounts forwarded to GMail - total" href="http://www.cwru.edu/cgi-bin/dashboard/graph?metric_id=228">Email accounts forwarded to GMail - total for employees, students, and general affiliates (excluding alums)</a>
</li>
</ul>There are a lot of different ways to interpret those GMail forwarding stats. My particular interpretation (as I wait and watch them grow) is that our Webmail sucks and we should offer more email storage space. Your interpretation may differ, and your comments are welcome. 
<strong>&lt;Update&gt;</strong> In the future, I may want to do comparative analysis with this data. Rather than trust me to not lose it on my hard drive, I'll just link to it from here.
<ul>
<li>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/faculty-mail-usage.csv">faculty-mail-usage.csv</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/staff-mail-usage.csv">staff-mail-usage.csv</a>
</li>
<li>
<a href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/06/13/students-mail-usage.csv">students-mail-usage.csv</a>
</li>
</ul>
<strong>&lt;/Update&gt;</strong></div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Don't Limit Access of Your IT Information/Service</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/02/dont_limit_access_of_your_it_informationservice"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/06/02/dont_limit_access_of_your_it_informationservice</id>
    <published>2006-06-02T18:13:13Z</published>
    <updated>2006-06-02T18:12:52Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="portal" label="portal"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">Dear Fellow IT Persons on Campus, When you are developing your new service/system/what-have-you, try to refrain from limiting the ways in which users can access the service/system/information/what-have-you. The more open you are with your data (
<a title="Small Pieces Loosely Joined" href="http://www.smallpieces.com/">small pieces, loosely joined</a>), the better. Also, the downtime/lack-of-accessibility of your system won't be affected by the downtime of the system used to access it. Don't get it, yet? If you find yourself writing phrases like &quot;available only through&quot; or &quot;available exclusively through&quot; or &quot;you'll 
<em>have</em> to use 
<strong>x</strong> to access the data,&quot; you've tripped up on this concept. Still not relating to what I am suggesting? Go read this thread on the 
<a title="forum.case.edu" href="http://forum.case.edu/">forums</a> – 
<a title="forum.case.edu :: General Discussion :: help.case.edu getting replaced?" href="http://forum.case.edu/read/7/6671">help.case.edu getting replaced?</a>. Read this quote from the 
<a title="Student Accounts Receivable Weblog" href="http://blog.case.edu/student-accounts-receivable/">Student Accounts Receivable Weblog</a> in their entry 
<a title="Student Accounts Receivable Weblog: Billing Upgrade" href="http://blog.case.edu/student-accounts-receivable/2006/05/30/billing_upgrade">Billing Upgrade</a>:
<blockquote>Students will access QuikPAY exclusively through the my.case.edu portal.</blockquote>It's great that it will be available via the Portal. It's bad that that is the &quot;only&quot; way it will be available. Portals exist to aggregate information and services together. Portals are not for providing exclusivity for services.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Hiring Consulants to Do Your Project Does Not Remove Your Accountability for Its Failure</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/05/05/accountability"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/05/05/accountability</id>
    <published>2006-05-05T19:11:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-05-05T19:13:32Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="IT in Higher Ed" label="IT in Higher Ed"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="project management" label="project management"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>
<a title="Telegraph | Money | How consultants are cashing in on pure incompetence" href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&amp;grid=M3&amp;xml=/money/2006/05/05/ccjeff05.xml">How consultants are cashing in on pure incompetence</a>
</p>
<p>Oh how I have witnessed this myself.</p>
<p>Pulling a quote from the article:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I'm not saying that all consultants are charlatans. Neither is it unreasonable for businesses to call in experts for projects which require specialist knowledge, such as the installation of a computer system. But when retailers start hiring consultants to do the retailing, you've got to wonder.</p>
<p>In a letter to the US business magazine, Fortune, an American executive, Charles Yarham, explained the remarkable boom in consultancy.</p>
<p>&quot;If you initiate a project on your own and it succeeds, well, that's your job. If the programme fails, it's your neck. However, if you hire a consultant and the project succeeds, it's a feather in your cap. If the project fails, you have a consulting firm to blame. After all, they're the experts.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I think of this as symptomatic of the growing trend to consolidate power, decision-making, and discretionary budget use higher and higher up the chain of command. But what is not flowing along with it is the accountability. Because, as was quoted above, &quot;if you hire a consultant and the project succeeds, it's a feather in your cap... if the project fails, you have a consulting firm to blame.&quot;</p>
<p>a) I think this is a terrible trend. b) If we have to go down this dark path, the accountability should flow upwards with everything else. If one hires a consulting firm to do something, and that consulting firm overprices, under-delivers, exceeds the time table, or otherwise fails in any way, the person who hired that consulting firm should be held directly accountable. If a manager is not knowledgeable enough to not be able to see through consultants' and marketers' BS, they shouldn't be working in management. Or if the manager relied on the evaluations of his in-house specialists to evaluate consultants and the in-house staff chose poorly, they should be held accountable, too.</p>
<p>
<em>Hiring consultants to do a job should not remove accountability.</em>
</p>
<p>The other great quote from the article which is just an application and retread of a 
<a title="Niccolï¿½ Machiavelli - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machiavelli">Machiavelli</a> quote:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>[The executive] having abnegated so much responsibility, how could he possibly be confident that what the consultants were telling him made sense?</p>
<p>Or, as Machiavelli put it: &quot;A prince who is not himself wise cannot be wisely advisedâ€¦ good advice depends on the shrewdness of the prince who seeks it.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>I Thought the &quot;Software Stack Wars&quot; Were Over</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/19/software_stack_wars"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/19/software_stack_wars</id>
    <published>2006-04-19T18:37:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-04-19T18:41:05Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="oracle" label="oracle"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">I thought this was over. I thought the industry had learned its lesson – installing vertically monolithic tiers from a single vendor that uses 
<a title="Jeremy Smith's blog: What is a 'Standard'" href="http://blog.case.edu/jms18/2006/04/07/what_is_a_standard">&quot;standards&quot; as a marketing term and not a core business principle</a> does not a) reduce cost, b) put you in a leveraging position with that vendor, c) improve user experience, or d) reduce complexity. I guess we haven't learned our lesson – 
<a title="Software's 'stack wars' | CNET News.com" href="http://news.com.com/Softwares%20stack%20wars/2100-1012_3-6062557.html?tag=sas.email">Software's &quot;stack wars&quot;</a>. Actually, I think this is a fluff piece meant to try and revive the thinking of this architectural style amongst the dinosaurs that still desperately cling to these notions. The first 
<a title="TalkBack: Best of breed - ancient history | reader response on CNET News.com" href="http://news.com.com/5208-1012-0.html?forumID=1&amp;threadID=16168&amp;messageID=138102&amp;start=-197">commenter</a> points out the obvious.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>What I Read Over the Weekend: Bringing &quot;Web 2.0&quot; Concepts to the &quot;Enterprise&quot;</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/17/web_20_for_the_enterprise"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith/2006/04/17/web_20_for_the_enterprise</id>
    <published>2006-04-17T19:53:23Z</published>
    <updated>2006-04-17T19:59:37Z</updated>
    <category term="Failures of Technology" label="Failures of Technology"/>
    <category term="General Information Technology" label="General Information Technology"/>
    <category term="blog" label="blog"/>
    <category term="collaboration" label="collaboration"/>
    <category term="enterprise systems" label="enterprise systems"/>
    <category term="information architecture" label="information architecture"/>
    <category term="it" label="it"/>
    <category term="knowledge management" label="knowledge management"/>
    <category term="mainblog" label="mainblog"/>
    <category term="social software" label="social software"/>
    <category term="web 2.0" label="web 2.0"/>
    <category term="wiki" label="wiki"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
<p>Interested in what I read about over this past weekend? No? Well... go ahead and stop reading then. 
<a title="Puppys Vs. Cat Video - Google Video" href="http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-2336001057263201649&amp;pl=true">Here's</a> something entirely more entertaining.</p>
<p>Yes? Well, the Internet was a-buzzin' with articles, comments, and opinions on bringing &quot;Web 2.0&quot; concepts &quot;inside the firewall&quot; i.e. using them in the &quot;Enterprise&quot; with emphasis on how it all relates to Knowledge Management Tools/Systems.</p>
<p>A lot of it was in reaction to Associate Professor at 
<a title="Harvard Business School" href="http://www.hbs.edu/">Harvard Business School</a> 
<a title="Andrew McAfee" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/">Andrew McAfee's</a> article 
<a title="MIT SMR Article, " enterprise="" the="" dawn="" of="" emergent="" spring="" andrew="" p.="" mcafee.="" reprint="" href="http://sloanreview.mit.edu/smr/issue/2006/spring/06/">&quot;Enterprise 2.0: The Dawn of Emergent Collaboration&quot;</a>, which the author summarized:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>There is a new wave of business communication tools including blogs, wikis and group messaging software â€” ... Enterprise 2.0 â€” that allow for more spontaneous, knowledge-based collaboration. These new tools... may well supplant other communication and knowledge management systems with their superior ability to capture tacit knowledge, best practices and relevant experiences from throughout [an enterprise] and make them readily available to more users.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>
<a title="Nicholas G. Carr" href="http://www.nicholasgcarr.com/">Nicholas Carr</a>, former executive editor of the 
<a title="Harvard Business Online | HBR" href="http://harvardbusinessonline.hbsp.harvard.edu/b02/en/hbr/hbr_home.jhtml?_requestid=14968">Harvard Business Review</a> and author of 
<a title="Amazon.com: Does IT Matter? Information Technology and the Corrosion of Competitive Advantage: Books: Nicholas G. Carr" href="http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1591394449/ref=ase_amazingbooks0b0/104-1076217-9273523?s=books&amp;v=glance&amp;n=283155&amp;tagActionCode=amazingbooks0b0">Does IT Matter?</a>, comments in 
<a title="Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: Is Web 2.0 enterprise-ready?" href="http://www.roughtype.com/archives/2006/04/is_web_20_enter.php">Is Web 2.0 enterprise-ready?</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>No matter how technologically elegant their design, knowledge management &quot;platforms&quot; and &quot;repositories&quot; tend to quickly collapse under the weight of their own complexity. Using them turns out to be more trouble than it's worth - particularly for those employees who have the most valuable knowledge - and the platforms and repositories fall into disuse and are eventually, and quietly, dismantled. People go back to using efficient, direct conversations - through meetings, or phone calls, or emails, or instant messages - to exchange useful knowledge...</p>
<p>He then explains what makes Web 2.0 technologies different. &quot;The good news,&quot; he writes, is that the new technologies &quot;focus not on capturing knowledge itself, but rather on the practices and output of knowledge workers.&quot;</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Andrew McAfee comments on Nicholas's comments in 
<a title="Andrew McAfee" href="http://blog.hbs.edu/faculty/amcafee/index.php/faculty_amcafee_v3/does_web_20_guarantee_enterprise_20/">Does Web 2.0 guarantee Enterprise 2.0?</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>If you believe that this migration [of enterprises using so-called &quot;Web 2.0&quot; tools] wonâ€™t take place, you believe essentially that companiesâ€”interdependent groups of people with a common mission and a profit motive â€” are less able or less likely to engage in free-form collaboration than the mass of previously indepedent volunteer freelancers that have made 
<a href="http://www.wikipedia.org/">Wikipedia</a>, 
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/">Flickr</a>, 
<a href="http://myspace.com/">MySpace</a>, 
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/">YouTube</a>, 
<a href="http://del.icio.us/">del.icio.us</a>, 
<a href="http://www.digg.com/">Digg</a>, etc. so powerful and successful.</p>
<p>Lots of knowledge workers spend lots of their time on two activities: keeping their colleagues appraised of what theyâ€™re doing, what progress has been made, what theyâ€™ve learned/concluded, etc. and trying to locate resources within their own organizations... Blogs (like the other Enterprise 2.0 tools) can help with the first of these tasks, and in doing so also help with the second. Itâ€™s not too farfetched to envision companies in which people use Enterprise 2.0 tools to report progress, collaborate, and share the outputs of these collaborations.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>In another article, 
<a title="Taking Web Services To The Office | Union Square Ventures: A New York Venture Capital Fund Focused on Early Stage &amp; Startup Investing" href="http://www.unionsquareventures.com/2006/04/taking_web_serv.html">Taking Web Services To The Office</a>, Fred Wilson compares how technologies used to emerge for &quot;Enterprises&quot; and consumers with how they emerge now:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Esther Dyson observed in 
<a href="http://www.release1-0.com/release1/abstracts.php?Counter=3840629">a Release 1.0 issue in 2004</a> (well before web 2.0 was upon us) that it used to be that technology would start with the goverment (military or space), then move to the enterprise, and end up in the consumer's hands. But, she said, these days technology starts with the consumer and moves up to the enterprise.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Commenting on this thread that is spreading is the article 
<a title="AlacraBlog: Knowledge Management 2.0" href="http://www.alacrablog.com/alacrablog/2006/04/knowledge_manag.html">Knowledge Management 2.0</a> which discusses the growth of current 
<acronym title="Knowledge Management">KM</acronym> tools versus how &quot;KM 2.0&quot; will grow:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Many of the failed knowledge management projects at financial services and professional services firms were top-down initiatives staffed by technology and information professionals. They required complex technology infrastructures and very long implementation timelines. One challenge was getting employees to share information through use of the system; another challenge was proving an acceptable ROI, given a very high level of investment and a difficult to measure return. In many cases no amount of management evangelism could lead employees to share knowledge in a complex and often difficult to use platform.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These &quot;top-down&quot; initiatives usually involve someone (called &quot;a consultant&quot; or a &quot;salesperson&quot;) who is master of spin i.e. a person who can BS with the best of them convincing those with decision making power that complex/convulated KM systems will enable their &quot;Enterprise.&quot; The easiest way to cut through these persons' BS is to make them step away from the carefully constructed Powerpoint buzzword generating machine and ask them to actually demonstrate how this system they're trying to hock will help Jane in sales find information from Greg in Engineering better than email or a phone call. Make them demonstrate the entire system from creation of &quot;knowledge&quot; all the way to the point where Jane retrieves it. If after the demonstration, it is still incredibly obvious that Jane sending an email to Greg and getting a response back is easier than their &quot;workflow enabled digital repository of knowledge,&quot; tell that consultant/salesperson to take their $600,000 contract, 7-9 month timeline, and ROI estimates elsewhere.</p>
<p>The final article I read was a month old one written by 
<a title="Ross Mayfield's Weblog" href="http://ross.typepad.com/">Ross Mayfield</a>, CEO of 
<a title="Socialtext Enterprise Wiki" href="http://www.socialtext.com/">Socialtext</a>, entitled 
<a title="An Adoption Strategy for Social Software in the Enterprise | Socialtext Enterprise Wiki" href="http://www.socialtext.com/node/70">An Adoption Strategy for Social Software in the Enterprise</a>. It's a long article and should be read in its entirety (like all of the other links), but I'll pull some quotes from it.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>Experience has shown that simply installing a wiki or blog (referred to collectively as 'social software') and making it available to users is not enough to encourage widespread adoption. Instead, active steps need to be taken to both foster use amongst key members of the community and to provide easily accessible support.</p>
<p>There are two ways to go about encouraging adoption of social software: fostering grassroots behaviours which develop organically from the bottom-up; or via top-down instruction. In general, the former is more desirable, as it will become self-sustaining over time - people become convinced of the tools' usefulness, demonstrate that to colleagues, and help develop usage in an ad hoc, social way in line with their actual needs.</p>
</blockquote>
<p>I can personally vouch for that in regards to the Case Blog, Case Wiki, and ITS internal wiki.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>... consider how social software fits in to the context of their job, their daily working processes and the wider context of their group's goals.</p>
<ul>
<li>What specific problems does social software solve?</li>
<li>What are the benefits for this person?</li>
<li>How can the software be simply integrated into their existing working processes?</li>
<li>How does social software lower their work load, or the cognitive load associated with doing specific tasks?</li>
</ul>
</blockquote>
<p>That harkens back to the earlier mini-rant I did in this post regarding 
<acronym title="Knowledge Management">KM</acronym> contractors/consultants/salespersons. Make them show you, not in Powerpoint or whitepapers — in an actual demonstration, from beginning to end, from creation to retrieval, how this system will help and enable and empower and 
<a title="Creating Passionate Users" href="http://headrush.typepad.com/">empassion</a> the users whose job it will be to use the system. If email or a phone call trumps their system...</p>
</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Jeremy Smith</name>
      <email>jeremy.smith@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/jeremy.smith</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
  <entry xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:default="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">
    <title>Service-Oriented Versus It-Does-It-All</title>
    <link href="http://blog.case.edu/gps10/2006/04/12/serviceoriented_versus_itdoesitall"/>
    <id>http://blog.case.edu/gps10/2006/04/12/serviceoriented_versus_itdoesitall</id>
    <published>2006-04-12T18:05:40Z</published>
    <updated>2006-04-12T19:15:15Z</updated>
    <category term="IT" label="IT"/>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">There is no doubt that applications are becoming more and more 
<a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Service-oriented_architecture">service oriented</a>, that is, loosely coupled, highly interoperable services being joined together to form a unified collection of applications. Service-oriented architecture (SOA) directly contrasts with the old, established architecture of one-thing-does-it-all. Imagine the following scenario. You need to buy a DVD player and a VCR (to play all those old tapes your wife has). You have two basic options. You can either buy a DVD/VCR combo unit or buy separate components. If you have any experience with home theater, you will know that in most cases, the DVD/VCR combo unit lags far behind the separate components in terms of features and quality. However, the combo unit, because it is only one component, sells for far less. Lesson learned: if you don't have the money and don't care about features and performance, the combo unit is they way to go. However, if you want two high quality components and you have the money to spend, buy the separate components. (The same analogy holds true for home theater receivers and amplifiers, but since less people would have understood that analogy, I selected to go with the DVD and VCR comparison). Now, let's examine this same scenario for IT services. Your company is looking to deploy a suite of applications to foster collaboration. The suits immediately start knocking on your door, telling you all about their six figures, per-seat license, it-does-it-all collaboration suit. At the same time, you hear voices from your middleware group, urging you to ignore the suits and to deploy independently-developed applications that are built on standards and have a proved track record. The suits promise their product is better for your enterprise because all the products are developed under the same roof and they work well with each other. Little to no configuration is needed because the ties between applications already exist. The middleware group can just point to standards-compliance and easy interoperability. After much schmoozing, free dinners, and promises from the suit-wearing sales drones, you give in, opting to deploy the all-in-one product. A few months down the road, your collaboration suite is deployed, and all is working well. However, you really want to deploy a new service that isn't included in the collaboration suite. Because you have all your eggs in one basket, you need this new service to integrate with the collaboration suite. You assign the task of investigating the integration. Two weeks later, people get back to you and say that the new service can't integrate with the collaboration suite because the collaboration suite doesn't have a sufficient remote interface. You call up the vendor, asking if they will support your new service. They don't, and they aren't planning on it (they really say the service will be in a future version, but you don't buy that). You slam your first on your desk, irritated you went with the all-in-one solution. The two scenarios share many characteristics. You want something that does A and B. You can either buy one thing that does both A and B, or separate things to do A and B. The in-one-box solution is simpler and costs less. However, as time goes on and you need to add in support for C, the in-one-box solution doesn't measure up because it is only meant to do A and B. However, the separate components are designed to integrate with other independent components, and you can easily plug in C. There is one major factor that affects the anology: Open-source software (OSS). With OSS, you can get separate components without the extra cost. You also get the ability to modify the applications to get the functionality you desire. You also get the piece of mind that you know what you are getting. Since the software is free, you can test drive it before making any committments to the suits. I've diverged a bit from the goal of this entry, which is to explain the benefits of SOA over it-does-it-all. With SOA, you have individual components designed to do A. And A, they do very well. With it-does-it-all, you have products that do A, B, C, and D. However, in most cases, you will find the product originally was designed to do A, and later added support for B, C, and D. With SOA, one product is built specifically for A. The concentration is A, and nothing but A. You realize that many will want A to work with B, C, and D, so you provide a robust interface to A, so that B, C, and D can be made to work with A. It does require a little more effort to make A work with B if they are separate products. However, if one is the best at doing A and another is best at doing B, isn't that better than a combined product that does both A and B to a lesser degree? Sure, A and B come pre-configured, but by doing so, you are sacrificing features and future interoperability. What good is a service if you can't interface with it? The bottom line: service-oriented architecture features separate components that are loosely coupled and very interoperable. Since components are separate, you often have the opportunity to pick and choose components that perform functionality A, B, and C. That means you can pick something that does A very well, B very well, etc. It may take a little longer to configure these products for your environment, but once done, you will have a solution that can perform A, B, and C better than a all-in-one solution that claims to perform A, B, and C. And a more functional product is what you want to deliver to the end-users.</div>
    </content>
    <author>
      <name>Gregory Szorc</name>
      <email>gregory.szorc@case.edu</email>
      <uri>http://blog.case.edu/gps10</uri>
    </author>
  </entry>
</feed>
