« April 2008 | Main | June 2008 »

May 28, 2008

A “Dynamic” twist in ERP/CRM

In recent discussions with some of the IT heads and managers during new business possibilities, I realized that the way they conceive IT as a function in the organization has changed over the years. The IT honchos are now fully agreeing to the KISS (Keep It Straight & Simple) principle and have realized that bringing in greater complexity actually prevents the way organizations would like to respond in an environment needing “flexible” responses. This does not mean that robustness and scalability is not in their mind. However, right now it has moved from realm of “pure technology” based solutions to one that can help solve business problems and are acceptable to people who are going to use this.

Some of the key IT managers are realizing that there is greater need to collaborate between the service providers and the companies in solving their problems. Gone are the days of outsourcing at application development only – it’s more collaborative, there are multiple paths and these need to be thrashed jointly so that the path chosen is optimal, if not perfect! Clients are looking at partners (read ‘Business Enablement with Technology’ partners and not ‘pure technology’ partners) who can help them in achieving the corporate goals with IT with a human face.

“Human face” is an interesting term as sometimes the recommendations coming from consultants are more to meet the contractual obligations, “make key users happy” and are actually “rigid”. The Human face talks about collaboration where there is a bit of change management along with appreciation of real business complexities on the ground. There are several businesses which have their own peculiar set of operational environment, and believe it or not there are many who would have gone with “best-of-breed” solutions for the industry which would be totally unviable and unacceptable to users and organization as a whole. Doesn’t this sound familiar? How many times have you actually seen this happen? There are best of breed solutions which though look good in conference room pilots fail to form the bond with the people in the organization.

And there comes the need for applications which are easy to use, provide lowest TCO, can be implemented fast and can be modeled to meet some of the USP of the businesses. There are several other needs for an “Adaptive” ERP/CRM solution as we might call it! However, if we look at the market you will see lot of products talking about what is “best of breed” without talking about how the organizational transformation would be achieved using the new application or even a set of applications.

I have myself worked on some of the traditional ERPs before moving to the new age ERP/CRM based on concept of usability, acceptance and flexibility. Over the years the organizations have matured in terms of business processes and the need is not to change the processes to meet the application frameworks, but the other way round! The classical debate of bringing the business to the application or vice-versa would never die as it would depend on the organizational needs and business environment. However, with products like Microsoft Dynamics in market which are growing in strength and acceptance over the years, I do see a ray of hope for those who think that they are doing business well, just that they are not able to control it well due to absence of tools/frameworks/applications which can help them streamline their “own” business processes and make them integrated. The “Dynamics” twist is there to help!!

May 19, 2008

Silverlight v/s Flex: …. And the winner is?

Sliverlight 2.0, the relatively new presentation technology offering from Microsoft, is fast maturing into a viable platform for building high quality Rich Interactive Applications (RIAs).  Needless to say, the incumbent presently dominating this space, Adobe Flex, is feeling the pressure. The developer community, RIA developers included, is always on the lookout for opportunities to improve quality and  productivity. So how does the contest stack up?

In the ‘Red corner’, we have Flex, an established, tried and tested technology.  Viewable in close to 85% browsers and with a strong RIA development community that sustains applications development in large, medium and small business /start up market.

In the ‘Blue corner’, is Sliverlight, a product still being fine tuned for big times.  It is backed up by a robust and scalable framework; and supports multiple languages - both static and dynamic, allowing more flexibility, but Microsoft has little history of building products targeted at RIA designers and developers.

It promises to be an interesting dual. Developers are obviously excited because the competition will drive both the platforms to outdo the other in offering features and capabilities.

While we await the RIA platform war to heat up, the Evangelists from respective platforms are doing their bit to get the word out about relative strengths of their products.  A very informative discussion on this topic can be found here, with interesting contributions from Ted Patrick of Adobe Systems and Scott Barnes of Microsoft.

Ted, quite rightly, has brought out the fact that Flex is not just ‘the older product’; but that ‘they have seen a nice ecosystem form and many open source components are being created for the toolset’.  Such self sustaining eco-systems with access to open source components are hard to replace with a new product boasting longer feature list.

Scott, on the other hand has brought out another vital fact – platform wars are not won purely by having products with longer, stronger feature lists.  For developers, it has to be about the ‘the shift in development direction going forward’.

From a maturity and field exposure point of view, the differences in the two platforms are so big that a comparison at this point is a bit premature. But if we go with what Silverlight promises to deliver, the point made by Scott in following paragraph may be the overwhelming deciding factor in favor of Silverlight – more potent than any tactical feature it may tout!

Flex takes time to learn, the ramp-up is quite extensive and when you take into account re-wiring brains to ActionScript 3.0, then exploring the framework and fully immersing yourself with the concept of a "mix-in" approach to life (Decorator pattern for OOP folks). Then you've probably hit the point of mastering the language in question. If one was to weigh up black and white approach to which direction one was to head, I'd look at it more from a direction of self-paced ROI. C# + XAML can get you open ended access inside the Microsoft product stack, ranging from IIS7.0 to Sharepoint through to Powershell, it's your passport into many things.

May 14, 2008

Visual Studio 2008 SP1 Beta and Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 Beta Now Available

Microsoft has released the Visual Studio 2008 SP1 Beta and Microsoft .NET Framework 3.5 SP1 Beta versions and is now available for download.

As per the MSDN website, the Visual Studio 2008 SP1 "includes support for SQL Server 2008, new ADO.NET features such as the Entity Framework, improvements to the WPF designers, WCF templates for Silverlight projects, debugger support for the .NET Framework public symbols and source release, control improvements such as the DataRepeater for Windows Forms and Office 2007 Ribbons for C++, and several general updates for debugging and IntelliSense. SP1 also enhances the stability, performance, and security of many features."

"The included .NET Framework 3.5 Service Pack 1 adds many new features and fixes, including the following:

  • .NET Framework Client Release (“Arrowhead”)
  • ASP.NET Dynamic Data
  • ASP.NET Routing
  • ADO.NET Data Services
  • ADO.NET Entity Framework"

To download the same please click the below links:

Office 2007 - Word has stopped working !

Yesterday while trying to open a DOCX file, my Word started to crash. Everytime I would open, i will get a message saying "Word has stopped working". However i tried to open the document, this kept on happening. Checking event log took me no closer to the issue

The message was "Faulting application WINWORD.EXE, version 12.0.6211.1000, time stamp 0x46d4a7df, faulting module wwlib.dll, version 12.0.6212.1000, time stamp 0x46e03d42, exception code 0xc0000005, fault offset 0x000210c6, process id 0x1738, application start time 0x01c8b579a153ac6b." with an EventID of 1000

I then tried to open a DOC file suspecting something had gone wrong with DOCX and that too caused the crash and needless to say Word had been working all these days. I hate it when things start to go wrong with no obvious reason. 

I was sure that there no devil's hand at work, so what went wrong all of a sudden? I then noticed "Connecting to Printer, Press ESC to Cancel" in the status bar when loading the document. Since I was travelling my default network printer was no longer accessible. Hmm ! Was that it? I set my local Microsoft XPS Document Writer as default printer and all seemed to be fine again. Word was able to open the documents without any issues.

It is strange that Word tries to connect to the default printer on startup itself. Ideally this should not happen till I really try to print. Afterall I was just trying to read the document !!

May 13, 2008

WPF Label or TextBlock

Pre WPF days just had a Label control and hence there wasn't really a choice. Now in WPF you have Label and a new TextBlock control. I have been wondering on usually which one to use in the application when i hit upon this interesting comparison between the two by Josh. There is one additional difference mentioned in comments down below on that blog that talk about auto inversion of colors for TextBlock if it is part of say a ListItem. However to me it looked more like setting the Foreground to white, since when i tried with styling the item selection color to something else, the TextBlock still showed white color.

Honestly I am now left more confused. TextBlock is light weight and hence good from app performance perspective, but Label gives the access key functionality, something that people prefer to have in their applications. It will be really good to have this functionality extended to TextBlock.

What is it that you use in your applications and why? Comments welcome. 

May 12, 2008

Web Accessibility: Myths and Misconceptions

In this last of the four-part blog series on fundamentals of Web Accessibility; let us consider some prevailing misconceptionss about web Accessibility.

In the early part of Web evolution, the available technologies did not adequately support Web accessibility. It was nearly impossible to develop visually appealing, complex, dynamic websites that were also adequately accessible.  But things have changed since those early days. Technologies spanning all the interconnected components - web technologies (XHTML and CSS), browsers and assistive technologies have evolved. Style sheets offer more presentation functionality. Browsers provide text resizing and assistive technologies can handle complex tables.


·         Myth One: Accessibility makes sites look bland and boring


The reasons for prevalence of this perception are historic. As already mentioned, technology did restrict the implementation of accessibility in early days of Web evolution.  But even as things started to improve, many organizations providing these sites could not upgrade the quality of design because they were short on design skills.  Another problem that prevailed was the inability to explore opportunities for creativity within the confines of accessibility requirements.  People misinterpreted WCAG 1.0 guidelines to mean that one cannot use JavaScript and cannot open new browser windows in accessible web sites. If a web page can ensure that a job can be done using an alternative way to the scripting, use of scripts per say is not prevented by accessibility standards. The same thing applies to the opening of new windows. The WCAG checkpoint 10.1 does not say don’t do it; it just says that if you do it, inform the user that you are doing it. Another important contributor to the ‘accessibility is boring’ perception in early days of Web was the lack of accessibility support in the then brand new ‘Flash’ user interface development technology.   


·         Myth Two:  Accessibility it expensive and hard


When organizations get started with accessibility, much of the cost is up-front knowledge and skills acquisition.  A few aspects of accessibility such as captions for multimedia are costly but it is possible to control the overall accessibility related expenses by starting accessibility implementation at the very beginning of the project, understanding and minimizing the costs across each interdependent component and involving people with disabilities throughout. Finally, given that accessibility is essential for equal opportunity for people and is required by law in many cases, the accessibility related expenses fall in its own category and accessibility cannot be sacrificed for cost cutting.


·         Myth Three: Accessibility is the sole responsibility of Web developers


As explained in the earlier blog post, a lot of pieces of technology need to work together to deliver the overall accessibility experience. Web developers need to follow the guidelines and requirements, but authoring tools and accessibility technologies could make it lot easy for web developers to implement sites that adhere to the accessibility requirements.


·         Myth Four: Accessibility is for people who are blind


Much of the efforts in implementing accessibility requirements (like WCAG standards) are directed towards helping blind people.  A lot or research publications and expert reviews have also focused on blind subjects thereby promoting this misconception that accessibility support is mainly for blind people.  But as explained in the first posting, web accessibility needs to accommodate a wide array of disabilities.  Authoring tools, assistive technologies as well as testing tools are available to ensure that all these disabilities are accommodated.


·         Myth Five: Evaluation tools can determine accessibility and conformance to standards


Web accessibility evaluation tools are software programs and online services that help determine if a website meets accessibility guidelines. Evaluation tools are very helpful and reduce the time and effort necessary for testing. But no tool in itself can completely determine the accessibility of a web site. An expert assessment is necessary because some of the accessibility requirements and checkpoints are not objective enough to allow complete automation of the accessibility testing process.

 

May 8, 2008

Windows XP SP3

New Service Pack - SP3 is now available for Windows XP. You can download it from here. Also note that you can also install SP3 from Windows Update.

If you are one of those who have already been working with IE 8 Beta, then you will need to uninstall it before installing SP3. Check more details on SP3's behavior with various IE versions here.  

May 6, 2008

Collaboration, Connectivity and devices –Future trends and .NET

In Future, A Disconnected device would be strange, would be an alien.
Here’s a presentation which throws some insight into the future web trends.http://www.slideshare.net/matthewbuckland/future-web-trends?src=related_normal&rel=193809
The Presentation mainly focuses on Connectivity, collaboration and discrete devices of today that would be transformed into intelligent smart connected devices in future.

Now when we look at it , Some questions of interest arise :

1.What is the size and growth rate of this market space?
2.What are these smart devices capable of? (Refer to my previous posts on this)
3.How do they collaborate with other devices, applications and the web?(Refer to my Previous posts on this)
4.What are the development tools available to develop such systems keeping in view the dynamics of this market and backward compatibility?
5.Are devices ranging across different resource constraints easy to program and Debug?
6.Are these devices capable of providing intuitive user interactions?
7.Is this ecosystem a secure paradigm?


When we analyze all these areas, we find that this ecosystem is the one for the future. Huge investments and development efforts are going to go into this in the near future.The markets for this ecosystem cut across all domains right from domestic toys, Gaming to Finance, Healthcare, Governance etc.

Now, We have a single development paradigm which offers to solve all our above concerns, be it RAD or device centric programming or SOA.It’s the “.NET Paradigm”.


The following six Frameworks and communication mechanisms along with associated technologies like DBMS etc. provide an end to end development facility across Applications, Web and Devices (even tiny and highly resource constrained ones).
.NET Framework
.NET Compact Framework
.NET Micro framework 
Windows Point of Service for .NET
Windows sideshow
DPWS and RF based communication protocols (Refer to my previous posts to get an idea on this)

Thanks to the  RAD environment like Visual Studio which makes development, debugging and deployment so easy even in the case of devices.So having identified the availability of the required mechanisms, it’s time to fasten our seat belts to face the challenges and deliver solutions for future demands in line with this emerging ecosystem. 

May 5, 2008

Web Accessibility: Interconnected Components

Much of the focus of web accessibility has been on the responsibilities of the web developer or web content developer. But accessible web content gets consumed through a series of interconnected technologies.  And for comprehensive accessibility, all these interconnected component technologies must work in tandem and must all support accessibility.

In my previous post about the accessibility related legal framework it was highlighted that the onus of understanding and implementing relevant accessibility standards and guidelines is on the web development agency.  But the web content developer has to work in a complex, interconnect world of technologies.


The different web development technology components that have impact on overall accessibility include
·         Content items like text, images, sounds and markup that defines structure and presentation
·         Web browsers and media players
·         Assistive technologies like screen readers, alternative keyboards, switches, scanning software
·         Authoring tools used to create web sites
·         Accessibility evaluation/testing tools and validation tools used to validate CSS and HTML


If an accessibility feature is not implemented in one component there is little motivation for the other components to implement it as the overall experience will not ensure accessibility. For example, developers are unlikely to implement an accessible feature that authoring tools do not support and that most browsers and assistive technologies do not implement consistently.


In my future postings, we will look at accessibility capabilities of Microsoft technologies like ASP.NET, WPF, Silverlight and Internet Explorer. As we do that, it is very important to keep in mind the interconnected nature of delivering accessible user experience.

Subscribe to this blog's feed

Follow us on

Blogger Profiles

Infosys on Twitter