Daily Archives

Articles indexed Tuesday March 16 2010

Page 83/130 | < Previous Page | 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90  | Next Page >

  • A Deep Dive into Transport Queues (Part 2)

    Johan Veldhuis completes his 'Deep Dive' by plunging even deeper into the mysteries of MS Exchange's Transport queues that are used to temporarily store messages which are waiting until they are passed through to the next stage, and explains how to change the way they work via configuration settings.

    Read the article

  • Active Directory Snapshots with Windows Server 2008

    Snapshots are a useful feature of Windows Server 2008. Taking a snapshot of Active Directory as a scheduled task can prove to be a wise precaution in case disaster strikes. Once they are mounted, they can be accessed by any LDAP tool which allows the user to specify a host name and port number. Ben Lye shows how you can restore attributes to a large numbers of broken distribution groups from a snapshot.

    Read the article

  • Single Item Recovery

    One of the more obscure parts of Exchange Server is the Dumpster. This allows the recovery of one or more deleted emails, in much the same way as the recycle bin in Windows, even if the user has purged them. Although it is seen as an alternative to backup, or as a means to document retention, it really provides a separate function, undoing an accidental deletion. Elie explains how to configure deleted retention items and how to recover a purged item.

    Read the article

  • Regional Office Virtualization - Less Can Be More

    The dream of an 'office in a box' has been around for years, but the increasing sophistication of virtualization software has turned the dream into reality. Ben Lye explains the problems and benefits of reducing the amount of physical hardware that were deployed in his organisation's regional offices.

    Read the article

  • Social Networking at Professional Events

    Dr. Masha Petrova compresses, into a small space, much good advice on networking with other professional people. She draws from her own experience as a technical expert to provide a detailed checklist of things you should and shouldn't do at conferences or tradeshows to be a successful 'networker'. As usual, she delivers sage advice with a dash of humour.

    Read the article

  • A Deep Dive into Transport Queues - Part 1

    Submission queues? Poison message queues? Johan Veldhuis unlocks the mysteries of MS Exchange's Transport queues that used to temporarily store messages waiting until they are passed through to the next stage, and explains how to manage these queues.

    Read the article

  • Customizing the Outlook Address Book

    It is possible to change the fields in the Outlook address book to make them a better fit for your organisation. Exchange provides templates for Users, Contacts, Groups, Public Folders, and Mailbox Agents that are downloaded to Outlook. Any changes will be visible in the address book. As usual with Exchange, careful planning before you make changes pays dividends, Ben Lye explains.

    Read the article

  • Exchange Server 2010 Compliance Capabilities

    Exchange 2010 now has more features to assist System Admistrators with Compliance, but are these features sufficient? Are they easy to use? Michael Smith gives a roundup of these new features, and points out where are useful, and where they fall short of providing a complete solution to the compliance task

    Read the article

  • The Art of Dealing with People

    Technical people generally don't easily adapt to being good salespeople. When a technical person takes on a customer-facing role as a support engineer, there are a whole lot of new skills required. Dr Petrova relates how the experience of a change in job gave her a new respect for the skills of sales and marketing.

    Read the article

  • Upgrade Exchange 2003 to Exchange 2010

    In this article, the first of two in which Jaap describes how to move from Exchange Server 2003 straight to Exchange Server 2010, he shows what is required before moving mailboxes from Exchange Server 2003 to Exchange Server 2010. He shows how to upgrade Active Directory, install both Exchange Server 2010 and certificates, and set up the Public Folder replication.

    Read the article

  • Active Directory Management with PowerShell in Windows Server 2008 R2

    One of the first things you notice with Windows Server 2008 R2 is that PowerShell 2.0 has become central to the admin function There is a powerful Active Directory module for Powershell that contains a provider and cmdlets that are designed to allow you to manage Active Directory from the command line. Now, you can also use versions for previous versions of Windows Server.

    Read the article

  • Implementing Cluster Continuous Replication, Part 2

    Cluster continuous replication (CCR) helps to provide a more resilient email system with faster recovery. It was introduced in Microsoft Exchange Server 2007 and uses log shipping and failover. configuring Cluster Continuous Replication on a Windows Server 2008 requires different techniques to Windows Server 2003. Brien Posey explains all.

    Read the article

  • SharePoint Web Part Constructor Fires Twice When Adding it to the Page (and has a different security

    - by Damon
    We had some exciting times debugging an interesting issue with SharePoint 2007 Web Parts.  We had some code in staging that had been running just fine for weeks and had not been touched or changed in about the same amount of time.  However, when we tried to move the web part into a different staging environment, the part started throwing a security exception when we tried to add it to a page.  After a bit of debugging, we determined that the web part was throwing the exception while trying to access the SPGroups property on the SharePoint site.  This was pretty strange because we were logged in as an admin and the code was working perfectly fine before.  During the debugging process, however, we found out that the web part constructor was being fired twice.  On one request, the security context did not seem to have everything it needed in order to run.  On the other request, the security context was populated with the user context with the user making the request (like it normally is).  Moving the security code outside of the constructor seems to have fixed the issue. Why the discrepancy between the two staging environments?  Turns out we deployed the part originally, then deployed an update with the security code.  Since the part was never "added" to the page after the code updates were made (we just deployed a new assembly to make the updates), we never saw the problem.  It seems as though the constructor fires twice when you are adding the web part to the page, and when you run the web part from the web part gallery.  My only thought on why this would occur is that SharePoint is instantiating an instance to get some information from it - which is odd because you would think that would happen with reflection without requiring a new object.  Anyway, the work around is to just not put anything security related inside the constructor, or to do a good job accounting for the possibility of the security context not being present if you are adding the item to the page. Technorati Tags: SharePoint,.NET,Microsoft,ASP.NET

    Read the article

  • The Politics of Junk Filtering

    - by mikef
    If the national postal service, such as the Royal Mail in the UK, were to go through your letters and throw away all the stuff it considered to be junk instead of delivering it to you, you might be rather pleased until you discovered that it took a too liberal decision about what was junk. Catalogs you'd asked for? Junk! Requests from charities? Who needs them! Parcels from competing carriers? Toss them away! The possibility for abuse for an agency that was in a monopolistic position is just too scary to tolerate. After all, the postal service could charge 'consultancy fees' to any sender who wanted to guarantee that his stuff got delivered, or they could even farm this out to other companies. Because Microsoft Outlook is just about the only email client used by the international business community in the west, its' SPAM filter is the final arbiter as to what gets read. My Outlook 2007, set to the default settings, junks all the perfectly innocent email newsletters that I subscribe to. Whereas Google Mail, Yahoo, and LIVE are all pretty accurate in detecting spam, Outlook makes all sorts of silly mistakes. The documentation speaks techno-babble about 'advanced heuristics', but the result boils down to an inaccurate mess. The more that Microsoft fiddles with it, the stickier the mess. To make matters worse, it still lets through obvious spam. The filter is occasionally updated along with other automatic 'security' updates you opt for automatic updates. As an editor for a popular online publication that provides a newsletter service, this is an obvious source of frustration. We follow all the best-practices we know about. We ensure that it is a trivial task to opt out of receiving it. We format the newsletter to the requirements of the Service Providers. We follow up, and resolve, every complaint. As a result, it gets delivered. It is galling to discover that, after all that effort, Outlook then often judges the contents to be junk on a whim, so you don't get to see it. A few days ago, Microsoft published the PST file format specification, under pressure from a European Union interoperability investigation by ECIS (the European Committee for Interoperable Systems). The objective was that other applications could then access existing PST files so as to migrate from existing Outlook installations to other solutions. Joaquín Almunia, the current competition commissioner, should now turn his attention to the more subtle problems of Microsoft Outlook. The Junk problem seems to have come from clumsy implementation of client-side spam filtering rather than from deliberate exploitation of a monopoly on the desktop email client for businesses, but it is a growing problem nonetheless. Cheers, Michael Francis

    Read the article

  • SharePoint 2010 release date - is it that important?

    - by CharlesLee
    There has been lots of excitement in the SharePoint community over the last few days as Microsoft have announced the official release date of SharePoint 2010. May 12th is the date for your diaries (RTM in April.) The twittersphere has been telling everyone for the last few days about this news and there is much excitement. The major conferences this year all seem to have a SharePoint 2010 focus and some are entirely focussed on the new product (e.g. SharePoint Evolution Conference.)  Now by all accounts Microsoft have plugged some significant functionality gaps that exist in WSS 3.0 and MOSS 2007 and provided some exciting new functionality.  You don't need me to tell you about these as the MVPs (and other community members) are doing a sterling job, after all that is why Microsoft has MVPs in the first place. Lets get real for a second though as there is a significant investment involved in moving to SharePoint 2010:  Firstly you need 64 bit architecture across the board, now for some environments that is no inconsequential hurdle, that's a pretty significant roadblock.   The development farm, test farm and UAT farm are all going to require the same infrastructure upgrades. To take advantage of the tooling for SP2010 you will need to upgrade to Visual Studio 2010 and your development team is going to require 64 bit hardware/OS too.  I would not recommend installing SP 2010 in client installation mode (i.e. for Windows 7) on your developer machines, I would use this for demo machines only. Something that lots of people seem to forget in all their whooping and hollering about the new release is that there is a large amount of end user training going to be required as the browser UI has now adopted the omnipotent ribbon interface and there are other new and more complicated features. SharePoint Designer has also entirely changed in both look and feel and some significant feature changes have taken place. Lest we should forget that some companies have not long upgraded to MOSS 2007 and are yet to see a significant ROI for that project. And the reticence that most companies feel about implementing v1 Microsoft products.  This is only the surface of the deeper issues which would be involved in any upgrade process, so I guess I share a small part of the concern voiced by Mark Miller of EndUserSharePoint.com.  Is SharePoint 2010 relevant? I don't share this sentiment in its entirety as I firmly believe that all companies should be looking at SharePoint 2010 from day one, however most large scale existing implementations of MOSS 2007 are going to be several years away from a serious upgrade project.  So should the conference organisers and the SharePoint community as a whole be a little more understanding of the real world issues?  It's easy to get carried away in the excitement of a new product and new tools to play with but there needs to be a focus on the real world issues that most people are facing day to day and at the moment and for the short term future (at the very least the next 12 months) that is fairly and squarely in the WSS 2.0/3.0 and SPS 2003/MOSS 2007 camps. Don't get me wrong, I am very very excited about getting to grips with SharePoint 2010 in the real world and I cannot wait for my first real project to come along, but for now I am just being realistic about the reality for most people who work with SharePoint. I have been spending a lot of time on www.sharepointoverflow.com recently as there is a community of people building up who are committed to answering the real world questions that folks are dealing with every day.  I urge you to take a look and either ask or answer some questions direct from the front line of the SharePoint world.

    Read the article

  • Analysing and measuring the performance of a .NET application (survey results)

    - by Laila
    Back in December last year, I asked myself: could it be that .NET developers think that you need three days and a PhD to do performance profiling on their code? What if developers are shunning profilers because they perceive them as too complex to use? If so, then what method do they use to measure and analyse the performance of their .NET applications? Do they even care about performance? So, a few weeks ago, I decided to get a 1-minute survey up and running in the hopes that some good, hard data would clear the matter up once and for all. I posted the survey on Simple Talk and got help from a few people to promote it. The survey consisted of 3 simple questions: Amazingly, 533 developers took the time to respond - which means I had enough data to get representative results! So before I go any further, I would like to thank all of you who contributed, because I now have some pretty good answers to the troubling questions I was asking myself. To thank you properly, I thought I would share some of the results with you. First of all, application performance is indeed important to most of you. In fact, performance is an intrinsic part of the development cycle for a good 40% of you, which is much higher than I had anticipated, I have to admit. (I know, "Have a little faith Laila!") When asked what tool you use to measure and analyse application performance, I found that nearly half of the respondents use logging statements, a third use performance counters, and 70% of respondents use a profiler of some sort (a 3rd party performance profilers, the CLR profiler or the Visual Studio profiler). The importance attributed to logging statements did surprise me a little. I am still not sure why somebody would go to the trouble of manually instrumenting code in order to measure its performance, instead of just using a profiler. I personally find the process of annotating code, calculating times from log files, and relating it all back to your source terrifyingly laborious. Not to mention that you then need to remember to turn it all off later! Even when you have logging in place throughout all your code anyway, you still have a fair amount of potentially error-prone calculation to sift through the results; in addition, you'll only get method-level rather than line-level timings, and you won't get timings from any framework or library methods you don't have source for. To top it all, we all know that bottlenecks are rarely where you would expect them to be, so you could be wasting time looking for a performance problem in the wrong place. On the other hand, profilers do all the work for you: they automatically collect the CPU and wall-clock timings, and present the results from method timing all the way down to individual lines of code. Maybe I'm missing a trick. I would love to know about the types of scenarios where you actively prefer to use logging statements. Finally, while a third of the respondents didn't have a strong opinion about code performance profilers, those who had an opinion thought that they were mainly complex to use and time consuming. Three respondents in particular summarised this perfectly: "sometimes, they are rather complex to use, adding an additional time-sink to the process of trying to resolve the existing problem". "they are simple to use, but the results are hard to understand" "Complex to find the more advanced things, easy to find some low hanging fruit". These results confirmed my suspicions: Profilers are seen to be designed for more advanced users who can use them effectively and make sense of the results. I found yet more interesting information when I started comparing samples of "developers for whom performance is an important part of the dev cycle", with those "to whom performance is only looked at in times of crisis", and "developers to whom performance is not important, as long as the app works". See the three graphs below. Sample of developers to whom performance is an important part of the dev cycle: Sample of developers to whom performance is important only in times of crisis: Sample of developers to whom performance is not important, as long as the app works: As you can see, there is a strong correlation between the usage of a profiler and the importance attributed to performance: indeed, the more important performance is to a development team, the more likely they are to use a profiler. In addition, developers to whom performance is an important part of the dev cycle have a higher tendency to use a much wider range of methods for performance measurement and analysis. And, unsurprisingly, the less important performance is, the less varied the methods of measurement are. So all in all, to come back to my random questions: .NET developers do care about performance. Those who care the most use a wider range of performance measurement methods than those who care less. But overall, logging statements, performance counters and third party performance profilers are the performance measurement methods of choice for most developers. Finally, although most of you find code profilers complex to use, those of you who care the most about performance tend to use profilers more than those of you to whom performance is not so important.

    Read the article

  • When Your Boss Doesn't Want you to Succeed

    - by Phil Factor
    You're working hard to get an application finished. You are programming long into the evenings sometimes, and eating sandwiches at your desk instead of taking a lunch break. Then one day you glance up at the IT manager, serene in his mysterious round of meetings, and think 'Does he actually care whether this project succeeds or not?'. The question may seem absurd. Of course the project must succeed. The truth, as always, is often far more complex. Your manager may even be doing his best to make sure you don't succeed. Why? There have always been rich pickings for the unscrupulous in IT.  In extreme cases, where administrators struggle with scarcely-comprehended technical issues, huge sums of money can be lost and gained without any perceptible results. In a very few cases can fraud be proven: most of the time, the intricacies of the 'game' are such that one can do little more than harbor suspicion.  Where does over-enthusiastic salesmanship end and fraud begin? The Business of Information Technology provides rich opportunities for White-collar crime. The poor developer has his, or her, hands full with the task of wrestling with the sheer complexity of building an application. He, or she, has no time for following the complexities of the chicanery of the management that is directing affairs.  Most likely, the developers wouldn't even suspect that their company management had ulterior motives. I'll illustrate what I mean with an entirely fictional, hypothetical, example. The Opportunist and the Aged Charities often do good, unexciting work that is funded by the income from a bequest that dates back maybe hundreds of years.  In our example, it isn't exciting work, for it involves the welfare of elderly people who have fallen on hard times.  Volunteers visit, giving a smile and a chat, and check that they are all right, but are able to spend a little money on their discretion to ameliorate any pressing needs for these old folk.  The money is made to work very hard and the charity averts a great deal of suffering and eases the burden on the state. Daisy hears the garden gate creak as Mrs Rainer comes up the path. She looks forward to her twice-weekly visit from the nice lady from the trust. She always asked ‘is everything all right, Love’. Cheeky but nice. She likes her cheery manner. She seems interested in hearing her memories, and talking about her far-away family. She helps her with those chores in the house that she couldn’t manage and once even paid to fill the back-shed with coke, the other year. Nice, Mrs. Rainer is, she thought as she goes to open the door. The trustees are getting on in years themselves, and worry about the long-term future of the charity: is it relevant to modern society? Is it likely to attract a new generation of workers to take it on. They are instantly attracted by the arrival to the board of a smartly dressed University lecturer with the ear of the present Government. Alain 'Stalin' Jones is earnest, persuasive and energetic. The trustees welcome him to the board and quickly forgive his humorless political-correctness. He talks of 'diversity', 'relevance', 'social change', 'equality' and 'communities', but his eye is on that huge bequest. Alain first came to notice as a Trotskyite union official, who insinuated himself into one of the duller Trades Unions and turned it, through his passionate leadership, into a radical, headline-grabbing organization.  Middle age, and the rise of European federal socialism, had brought him quiet prosperity and charcoal suits, an ear in the current government, and a wide influence as a member of various Quangos (government bodies staffed by well-paid unelected courtiers).  He was employed as a 'consultant' by several organizations that relied on government contracts. After gaining the confidence of the trustees, and showing a surprising knowledge of mundane processes and the regulatory framework of charities, Alain launches his plan.  The trust will expand their work by means of a bold IT initiative that will coordinate the interventions of several 'caring agencies', and provide  emergency cover, a special Website so anxious relatives can see how their elderly charges are doing, and a vastly more efficient way of coordinating the work of the volunteer carers. It will also provide a special-purpose site that gives 'social networking' facilities, rather like Facebook, to the few elderly folk on the lists with access to the internet. The trustees perk up. Their own experience of the internet is restricted to the occasional scanning of railway timetables, but they can see that it is 'relevant'. In his next report to the other trustees, Alain proudly announces that all this glamorous and exciting technology can be paid for by a grant from the government. He admits darkly that he has influence. True to his word, the government promises a grant of a size that is an order of magnitude greater than any budget that the trustees had ever handled. There was the understandable proviso that the company that would actually do the IT work would have to be one of the government's preferred suppliers and the work would need to be tendered under EU competition rules. The only company that tenders, a multinational IT company with a long track record of government work, quotes ten million pounds for the work. A trustee questions the figure as it seems enormous for the reasonably trivial internet facilities being built, but the IT Salesmen dazzle them with presentations and three-letter acronyms until they subside into quiescent acceptance. After all, they can’t stay locked in the Twentieth century practices can they? The work is put in hand with a large project team, in a splendid glass building near west London. The trustees see rooms of programmers working diligently at screens, and who talk with enthusiasm of the project. Paul, the project manager, looked through his resource schedule with growing unease. His initial excitement at being given his first major project hadn’t lasted. He’d been allocated a lackluster team of developers whose skills didn’t seem right, and he was allowed only a couple of contractors to make good the deficit. Strangely, the presentation he’d given to his management, where he’d saved time and resources with a OTS solution to a great deal of the development work, and a sound conservative architecture, hadn’t gone down nearly as big as he’d hoped. He almost got the feeling they wanted a more radical and ambitious solution. The project starts slipping its dates. The costs build rapidly. There are certain uncomfortable extra charges that appear, such as the £600-a-day charge by the 'Business Manager' appointed to act as a point of liaison between the charity and the IT Company.  When he appeared, his face permanently split by a 'Mr Sincerity' smile, they'd thought he was provided at the cost of the IT Company. Derek, the DBA, didn’t have to go to the server room quite some much as he did: but It got him away from the poisonous despair of the development group. Wave after wave of events had conspired to delay the project.  Why the management had imposed hideous extra bureaucracy to cover ISO 9000 and 9001:2008 accreditation just as the project was struggling to get back on-schedule was  beyond belief.  Then  the Business manager was coming back with endless changes in scope, sorrowing saying that the Trustees were very insistent, though hopelessly out in touch with the reality of technical challenges. Suddenly, the costs mount to the point of consuming the government grant in its entirety. The project remains tantalizingly just out of reach. Alain Jones gives an emotional rallying speech at the trustees review meeting, urging them not to lose their nerve. Sadly, the trustees dip into the accumulated capital of the trust, the seed-corn of all their revenues, in order to save the IT project. A few months later it is all over. The IT project is never delivered, even though it had seemed so incredibly close.  With the trust's capital all gone, the activities it funded have to be terminated and the trust becomes just a shell. There aren't even the funds to mount a legal challenge against the IT company, even had the trust's solicitor advised such a foolish thing. Alain leaves as suddenly as he had arrived, only to pop up a few months later, bronzed and rested, at another charity. The IT workers who were permanent employees are dispersed to other projects, and the contractors leave to other contracts. Within months the entire project is but a vague memory. One or two developers remain  puzzled that their managers had been so obstructive when they should have welcomed progress toward completion of the project, but they put it down to incompetence and testosterone. Few suspected that they were actively preventing the project from getting finished. The relationships between the IT consultancy, and the government of the day are intricate, and made more complex by the Private Finance initiatives and political patronage.  The losers in this case were the taxpayers, and the beneficiaries of the trust, and, perhaps the soul of the original benefactor of the trust, whose bid to give his name some immortality had been scuppered by smooth-talking white-collar political apparatniks.  Even now, nobody is certain whether a crime was ever committed. The perfect heist, I guess. Where’s the victim? "I hear that Daisy’s cottage is up for sale. She’s had to go into a care home.  She didn’t want to at all, but then there is nobody to keep an eye on her since she had that minor stroke a while back.  A charity used to help out. The ‘social’ don’t have the funding, evidently for community care. Yes, her old cat was put down. There was a good clearout, and now the house is all scrubbed and cleared ready for sale. The skip was full of old photos and letters, memories. No room in her new ‘home’."

    Read the article

  • Music before bells and whistles

    - by Tony Davis
    Why is it that Windows has so much difficulty in finding content on its file system? This is not an insurmountable technical problem; on my laptop, I have a database within which I can instantly find text or names within millions of records, within 300 milliseconds. I have a copy of Google Desktop that can find phrases within emails or documents, almost as quickly. It is an important, though mundane, part of an operating system to be able to find files. The first thing I notice within Windows is that the facility to find files or text within files is called 'search' rather than 'find'. Hmm. This doesn’t bode well. What’s this? It does a brute-force search for file names? Here we are in an age when we can breed mice that glow in the dark, and manufacture computers that fit in our shirt pockets, and we find an operating system that is still entirely innocent of managing and indexing content in hierarchical data. I can actually read the files of my PC into a database, mimic the directory/folder hierarchies and then find files in a flash; but when I do the same with Windows Vista, we are suddenly back in a 1960s time warp. Finding files based on their name is bad enough, but finding files based on the content that they contain is more or less asking for an opportunity to wait 20 minutes in order to see a "file not found" message. Sadly, with Windows 7, Microsoft seems to have fallen into the familiar trap of adding bells and whistles before finishing the song. It's certainly true that Microsoft has added new features and a certain polish to Windows Search 4.0, the latest incarnation. It works more like a web search and offers a new search syntax, called Advanced Query Syntax, which allows you to search on file author, file size, date ranges (e.g. date:=7/4/09still does not work reliably. I've experienced first-hand its stubborn refusal, despite a full index, to acknowledge the existence of a file I know exists, based on a search for a specific term within that file that I know is in there somewhere; a file that Google Desktop search, or old wingrep, finds in seconds. When users hark back to the halcyon days of Windows XP search, you know something is seriously amiss. Shouldn't applications get the functionality right before applying animated menus and Teletubby graphics, or is advancing age making me grumpy? I’d be pleased to hear your views, as always. Cheers, Tony.

    Read the article

  • Exposing an MVC Application Through SharePoint

    - by Damon
    Below you will find my presentation slides and demo files for my SharePoint TechFest 2010 presentation on Exposing an MVC Application through SharePoint.  One of the points I forgot to mention goes back to the performance and licensing benefits of this approach.  If you have a SharePoint box that is completely slammed, you can put the MVC application on a separate web server and essentially offload the application processing to another server.  In terms of licensing, you can leave SharePoint off that new server and just access SharePoint data via web services from the box.  This makes it a lot cheaper if you have MOSS - but if you're just running WSS then it may not have as many cost benefits.  Remember, programming against the web services is not always the easiest thing, so you have to weight the cost/benefit ratio when making such a determination.

    Read the article

  • Google, typography, and cognitive fluency for persuasion

    - by Roger Hart
    Cognitive fluency is - roughly - how easy it is to think about something. Mere Exposure (or familiarity) effects are basically about reacting more favourably to things you see a lot. Which is part of why marketers in generic spaces like insipid mass-market lager will spend quite so much money on getting their logo daubed about the place; or that guy at the bus stop starts to look like a dating prospect after a month or two. Recent thinking suggests that exposure effects likely spin off cognitive fluency. We react favourably to things that are easier to think about. I had to give tech support to an older relative recently, and suggested they Google the problem. They were confused. They could not, apparently, Google the problem, because part of it was that their Google toolbar had mysteriously vanished. Once I'd finished trying not to laugh, I started thinking about typography. This is going somewhere, I promise. Google is a ubiquitous brand. Heck, it's a verb, and their recent, jaw-droppingly well constructed Paris advert is more or less about that ubiquity. It trades on Google's integration into any information-seeking behaviour. But, as my tech support encounter suggests, people settle into comfortable patterns of thinking about things. They build schemas, and altering them can take work. Maybe the ubiquity even works to cement that. Alongside their online effort, Google is running billboard campaigns to advertise Chrome, a free product in a crowded space. They are running these ads in some kind of kooky Calibri / Comic Sans hybrid. Now, at first it seems odd that one of the world's more ubiquitous brands needs to run a big print campaign in public places - surely they have all the fluency they need? Well, not so much. Chrome, after all, is not the same as their core product, so there's some basic awareness work to do, and maybe a whole new batch of exposure effect to try and grab. But why the typeface? It's heavily foregrounded, and the ads are extremely textual. Plus, don't we all know that jovial, off-beat fonts look unprofessional, or something? There's a whole bunch of people who want (often rightly) to ban Comic Sans I wonder, though. Are Google trying to subtly disrupt cognitive fluency? There's an interesting paper (pdf) about - among other things - the effects of typography on they way people answer survey questions. Participants given the slightly harder to read question gave more abstract answers. The paper references other work suggesting that generally speaking, less-fluent question framing elicits more considered answers. The Chrome ad typeface is less fluent for print. Reactions may therefore be more considered, abstract, and disruptive. Is that, in fact, what Google need? They have brand ubiquity, but they want here to change accustomed behaviour, to get people to think about changing their browser. Is this actually a very elegant piece of persuasive information design? If you think about their "what is a browser?" vox pop research video, there's certainly a perceptual barrier they're going to have to tackle somehow.

    Read the article

  • It’s official – Red Gate is a great place to work!

    - by red@work
    At a glittering award ceremony last week, we found out that we’re officially the 14th best small company to work for in the whole of the UK! This is no mean feat, considering that about 1,000 companies enter the Sunday Times Top 100 best companies awards each year. Most of these are in the small companies category too. It's the fourth year in a row for us to be in the Top 100 list and we're tickled pink because the results are based on employee opinion. We’re particularly proud to be the best small company in Cambridge (in the whole of East Anglia, in fact) and the best small software development company in the entire UK. So how does it all work? Well, 90% of us took the time to answer over 70 questions on categories such as management, benefits, wellbeing, leadership, giving something back and what we think of Red Gate as a whole. It makes you think about every part of day to day working life and how you feel about it. Do you slightly or strongly agree or disagree that your manager motivates your to do your best every day, or that you have confidence in Red Gate's leaders, or that you’re not spending too much time working? It's great to see that we had one of the best scores in the country for the question "Do you think your company takes advantage of you?" We got particularly high scores for management, wellbeing and for giving something back too. A few of us got dressed up and headed to London for the awards; very excited about where we’d place but slightly nervous about having to get up on stage. There was a last minute hic up with a bow tie but the Managing Editor of the Sunday Times kindly stepped in to offer his assistance just before we had our official photo taken. We were nominated for two Special Recognition Awards. Despite not bringing them home this year, we're very proud to be nominated as there are only three nominations in each category. First we were up for the Training and Development award. Best Companies loved that we get together at lunchtimes to teach each other photography, cookery and French, as well as our book clubs and techie talks. And of course they liked our opportunities to go on training courses and to jet off to international conferences. Our other nomination was for the Wellbeing award. Best Companies loved our free food (and let’s face it, so do we). Porridge or bacon sandwiches for breakfast, a three course hot dinner, and free fruit and cereals all day long. If all that has an affect on the waistline then there are plenty of sporty activities for us all to get involved in, such as yoga, running or squash. Or if that’s not your thing then a relaxing massage helps us all to unwind every few months or so. The awards were hosted by news presenter Kate Silverton. She gave us a special mention during the ceremony for having great customer engagement as well as employee engagement, after we told her about Rodney Landrum (a Friend of Red Gate) tattooing our logo on his arm. We showed off our customised dinner jacket (thanks to Dom from Usability) with a flashing Red Gate logo on the back and she seemed suitability impressed. Back in the office the next day, we popped open the champagne and raised a glass to our success. Neil, our joint CEO, talked about how pleased he was with the award because it's based on the opinions of the people that count – us. You can read more about the Sunday Times awards here. By the way, we're still growing and are still hiring. If you’d like to keep up with our latest vacancies then why not follow us on Twitter at twitter.com/redgatecareers. Right now we're busy hiring in development, test, sales, product management, web development, and project management. Here's a link to our current job opportunities page – we'd love to hear from great people who are looking for a great place to work! After all, we're only great because of the people who work here. Post by: Alice Chapman

    Read the article

  • SharePoint: Numeric/Integer Site Column (Field) Types

    - by CharlesLee
    What field type should you use when creating number based site columns as part of a SharePoint feature? Windows SharePoint Services 3.0 provides you with an extensible and flexible method of developing and deploying Site Columns and Content Types (both of which are required for most SharePoint projects requiring list or library based data storage) via the feature framework (more on this in my next full article.) However there is an interesting behaviour when working with a column or field which is required to hold a number, which I thought I would blog about today. When creating Site Columns in the browser you get a nice rich UI in order to choose the properties of this field: However when you are recreating this as a feature defined in CAML (Collaborative Application Mark-up Language), which is a type of XML (more on this in my article) then you do not get such a rich experience.  You would need to add something like this to the element manifest defined in your feature: <Field SourceID="http://schemas.microsoft.com/sharepoint/3.0"        ID="{C272E927-3748-48db-8FC0-6C7B72A6D220}"        Group="My Site Columns"        Name="MyNumber"        DisplayName="My Number"        Type="Numeric"        Commas="FALSE"        Decimals="0"        Required="FALSE"        ReadOnly="FALSE"        Sealed="FALSE"        Hidden="FALSE" /> OK, its not as nice as the browser UI but I can deal with this. Hang on. Commas="FALSE" and yet for my number 1234 I get 1,234.  That is not what I wanted or expected.  What gives? The answer lies in the difference between a type of "Numeric" which is an implementation of the SPFieldNumber class and "Integer" which does not correspond to a given SPField class but rather represents a positive or negative integer.  The numeric type does not respect the settings of Commas or NegativeFormat (which defines how to display negative numbers.)  So we can set the Type to Integer and we are good to go.  Yes? Sadly no! You will notice at this point that if you deploy your site column into SharePoint something has gone wrong.  Your site column is not listed in the Site Column Gallery.  The deployment must have failed then?  But no, a quick look at the site columns via the API reveals that the column is there.  What new evil is this?  Unfortunately the base type for integer fields has this lovely attribute set on it: UserCreatable = FALSE So WSS 3.0 accordingly hides your field in the gallery as you cannot create fields of this type. However! You can use them in content types just like any other field (except not in the browser UI), and if you add them to the content type as part of your feature then they will show up in the UI as a field on that content type.  Most of the time you are not going to be too concerned that your site columns are not listed in the gallery as you will know that they are there and that they are still useable. So not as bad as you thought after all.  Just a little quirky.  But that is SharePoint for you.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90  | Next Page >