Ben Barden - Life of a web developer

My new album - and is the Internet stifling new music?

Ben — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 23:30:00 -0600

I've just released my fifth album of original music, entitled A Change of Scenery. The entire album is available to download or stream online.

Is the Internet stifling new music?

This seems like a good opportunity to comment on an article over at BBC News, where they ask the question: is the Internet stifling new music? The arguments put forth by John Taylor (bassist with Duran Duran) are distilled below:

1. Those of us who before would have been looking towards the current culture for inspiration are now often to be found in various backwaters of older music.

2. The speed and growth of new technology, which has been so heralded and so much fuss has been made of, has actually served to disguise how little real growth is taking place at the artistic level.

3. When artists today are asked to Twitter their every thought, their every action, to record on video their every breath, their every performance, I believe they're diluting their creative powers, their creative potency and the durability of their work. And in the long run I believe they're also diluting the magical power and the magnetic attraction that they can or will ever have over their audience.

I'm not sure I agree with all of this. Let me explain why...

Old classics die hard.

I don't see the problem with looking to older music for inspiration. I do see a slight problem with statements like "there's no good music nowadays", or "nobody can beat (insert popular artist name from yesteryear)". These statements were not made in the above article, but they're in common usage. Will a band ever beat The Beatles? Has Elton John had his day? Can anyone really out-Elvis Elvis? Would they be able to do so without being viewed as an impersonator? Though to be fair, they might just be one.

Listening to music shouldn't only be something we do at the time it's released. Also, for musicians, older music can be influential. I have numerous influences, ranging from classical music to electronic music, 1960s to 1990s and beyond.

While even the tiniest idea from an existing musician can realistically become a totally unique track, as time goes on, more and more music is made, which makes it harder and harder to be truly original. It's not impossible, but even if you think you're producing original music, some listeners may recognise similarities in music that the composers didn't know about.

In my view, there's so much music behind us, it would be daft to completely ignore it and only look at the music of today and tomorrow.

Rise of the robots.

I don't fully understand how the speed and growth of technology is a bad thing. There are many of examples of how existing technology has been used in creative ways.

For instance, The Beatles assembled various bits and pieces together to create Revolution 9, which to be honest I didn't like one bit, but it was - shall we say - an "interesting" listen. Mike Oldfield, multi-instrumentalist who's done a lot more than just Tubular Bells (check out Music of the Spheres, it's well worth a listen), managed to record many different parts on the same tape by covering the erase head on his tape recorder. I'm sure there are numerous other examples. Jean Michel Jarre has used numerous instruments over his career, many of which were new technology at the time he first used them. Would we be better off without these, and other, technological advances?

That's not to say that everyone is being creative or artistic with everything they do. But I see no harm in a bit of experimentation, and to be honest, exploiting technology to see what we can get out of it. The key is in knowing how to identify what works and what doesn't. The usage of new technology is not automatically a bad thing.

Technology aside, could we ever say that musicians always produce excellent material? Of course, it's all subjective - your favourite albums might not hit all the same notes with me. In the technical sense, of course they hit the same notes... just not necessarily the ones I like best!

The Twitter debate.

As for the use, or rather the over-use, of social media sites such as Twitter... it's for you to choose if you use or abuse. I believe that you can use Twitter to connect with your audience, and that not everyone overuses it.

WIth so much music out there, it's more important than ever before that musicians connect with their fanbase. New technology allows us to do that very well indeed. Perhaps some musicians would prefer to be something of an enigma, but equally, fans may prefer not to be shut out.

It's up to you to choose how much you want to put out there about yourself, and I don't agree with violating someone's privacy... but if you try to shut yourself away, you may just find that people pass you by.

Anyway, that's my view - what do you think? Is the Internet stifling new music? And have you heard my new album?

Top 10 Tips for the Tube

Ben — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 18:00:00 -0600

Using the Tube (or the London Underground, if you're not from around here) requires a certain level of understanding to avoid receiving evil glares or a "tut" from one of the many other passengers. Here are 10 tips that you might find beneficial.

1. Don't ignore the ticket barrier that says "Seek assistance". If you try and use a ticket or an Oyster card that flashes up a message, "Seek assistance", best to do so. From time to time you may have better luck on one of the other ticket barriers, but it's worth hunting down the nearest member of staff as soon as you can, so any problems with your ticket or card can be quickly addressed. Don't just keep trying it over and over again.

2. Be careful when it's wet. When it's been raining, the Tube is slippery. Shiny floors and shoes that don't grip are a bad combination, particularly in wet weather. Escalators are potentially lethal. Watch your step!

3. Don't stand on the left. When there's a long line of people standing on the right of an escalator, it's nice to have a clear path so you can walk on the left. I usually walk on the left to get a bit of exercise, and to get around the Tube that little bit faster. It is infuriating to walk partway up or down an escalator only to find you can't get any further because someone or something is blocking the way. That brings me nicely to the next point...

4. One pushchair can create an enormous queue. I certainly wouldn't want to try and use a wheelchair on the Tube, as a lot of the stations just aren't equipped for it. But you'd think that people with a pushchair would understand this too. Nope, instead they just plough on regardless. Some of the escalators are long, and taking a pushchair with you can create a massive queue. It can't be easy for you to get around the Tube with a pushchair - wouldn't it be easier to take the bus? (Thoughts welcome; I'm not sure of the best option here, but I'm not sure the Tube is the best way.)

5. Let people off before you get on. Really, it's just common courtesy, although sometimes there are so many people getting off it's hard to know when you'll be able to get on. But it's going to be a lot slower if everyone gets on before everyone else gets off.

6. Don't try and pull the doors open. If the doors are closing or they have just closed, don't try and get on or off the train. I've actually seen someone trying to pull the doors open from outside. They succeeded, but didn't get on because one of the Tube staff was quite patiently asking them to stop. It's for your own safety really.

7. If loads of people get on but there's another train in 1 minute, it's ok to wait for the next one. I've seen this a lot - a huge crowd of people swarm onto an already-busy train. The result: a very crowded train. Check when the next train is coming - if it'll be there in 1 or 2 minutes, it may be quieter. You do have to get on at some point, and they might all be pretty busy, but this tip has worked for me on a number of occasions - it's worth a shot.

8. Move right down inside the car. With so many people getting on, it's important to make use of the available space. Don't just get on and stand by the door if there's room in front of the seats and other people are getting on behind you. I've seen people who block the empty walkways and force everyone to stand in a big crowd just to get on. A bit silly if you ask me.

9. The driver won't wait for you to sit down. If you get a seat, sit down right away - don't mess around with your coat, bag or hair. I've seen plenty of people who end up sitting on the person next to them because the train set off just as they were sitting down.

10. Hold on! The Tube can be a jerky ride, particularly when it starts and stops, but there can be plenty of bumps along the way. If you can, hold on. There are people who seem to be able to stand without holding on, but if you're not sure you can do it, don't take the risk.

Image credit: Knivesout.

Do you have any tips for the Tube? Is there anything that you find particularly annoying?

Smart Casual: the perfect dress code?

Ben — Sun, 08 Nov 2009 17:00:00 -0600

"Smart Casual" is a flexible dress code that is open to interpretation, but might cause confusion for some. Is it the best dress code to adopt?

I used to work for an insurance company where all staff had to be smart. Men had no option but to wear a shirt and tie, with smart shoes. This seemed a bit unfair - women had to be smart too, but they had more options than the men did.

Dressing up for an important meeting or an interview is understandable. If you work directly with your customers, then perhaps you have to wear a uniform, or dress smart to give a good impression. That's one thing. But in a company where most staff rarely met with external suppliers let alone our customers, I never really saw the point in everyone being quite so smart.

Perhaps the company believed that a smartly-dressed workforce would behave in a more professional way than if we dressed down. I think this approach can backfire. Having to dress up every day makes me wonder if the company didn't trust its employees to work well unless they're extremely formal. This is absurd. Surely we'd all work better if we can dress comfortably?

The funny thing was that you could dress down on a Friday. Were they accepting the fact that Fridays aren't very productive? Or was it a "reward" for working in smart clothes for 80% of the week? I never quite figured that one out.

I already know that smart casual is a good idea for some companies. I now work for a web agency where the dress code is smart casual. Some people are more casual than smart, but nobody pushes the rule too far. So how does this affect the productivity and engagement of the workforce? Well, to be fair, I don't think things would take a nose-dive if we had to be smart. But I don't know anyone who would prefer to be smart.

Smart casual doesn't have to mean "scruffy", and you can still look semi-smart if you like. For instance, I'd rather wear a smart shirt than a t-shirt. But I find that trainers are a good option because I walk a lot. So I adopt something of a mix-and-match approach.

Smart casual is also easier to change with the weather. I used to find that a suit didn't keep me warm in the winter, but I was too hot in the summer. You do have options, but a smart casual dress code gives you a lot more flexibility.

And flexibility is important. I like to have a say in what I wear to work. When you spend at least 40 hours a week at work (not including the time spent commuting), it's not much fun if you feel uncomfortable for the entire period.

What do you wear to work? Is smart casual a good idea? Why/why not?

(Thanks to my wife, Lauren, for taking this photo. L to R: me, my sister, and my brother. This photo is the first time I've worn a tie since September 2006.)

Injader plugins

Ben — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 14:00:00 -0600

This is a bit of a double whammy, actually. Maybe triple? Who knows. Let me explain...

I've just added a new page to the Injader website that lists all of the changes completed for the next version. You can see it on the new Upcoming Versions page.

This page is not something I need to update manually. I have just started using Mantis to organise bug reports, enhancements and other change requests. Whenever I resolve an issue in Mantis, it will appear on the Upcoming Versions page automatically.

There is also a "Released Versions" page that is currently empty, but will become relevant once the next version of Injader comes out.

This also signals a move towards plugins for functionality that shouldn't be included in the default Injader install. While Injader has plenty of handy features that don't require plugins, some things are better left as addon functionality. For instance, I'd like to develop a Newsletter Manager to take on the likes of Aweber, by providing a feature-rich, easy to use interface that you don't have to pay for. But if it was part of the Injader core, I'd have to keep releasing new versions of Injader even if the Newsletter Manager was the only thing that changed.

Some features do make sense in the core, but not all. This Mantis plugin is an excellent example of something that might be of benefit to some people, but that works better as a plugin.

I'll be writing more about plugins in Injader soon.

Twitter lists: to discuss or not to discuss?

Ben — Sun, 01 Nov 2009 19:00:00 -0600

Recently, Twitter introduced the concept of lists - a simple way to put groups of your followers in one place. Third-party tools such as TweetDeck have provided similar functionality for months, but these tend to do so as a private feature, in that you can only see your own groups/lists. However, the built-in lists on the Twitter website can be either public or private.

Initially, the feedback sounded quite good. I found lists useful and a lot of the people I follow posted mostly positive comments about the feature. To give you some idea of the timeline, I noticed lists on my Twitter account on October 15th, when Mashable posted that "Twitter lists are live!".

A couple of weeks later, Chris Brogan criticised Twitter lists, calling them "exclusionary". This was mentioned in a further post by The Inquistr, who called Twitter lists an "A-list popularity contest". However, Scobleizer defended the idea, saying that we can't all be in every list. (For the record, I'm with Scobleizer on this one: I find lists useful.)

There are some great comments on both sides of the fence (although not on The Inquisitr, who seem to have little more than an "echo" section, listing tweets from people who shared the very post you're reading at the time - not much use really). However, I think what really stood out for me was this comment from Chris Brogan:

Funny how people are all panty-bunched about how @scobleizer or I view lists. Who cares? Advance the game. Make meaning.

Chris, if you don't care what people think about your views, why post them on a blog where comments are enabled? I fully accept that not everyone agrees on everything, and that not everyone will have an opinion on everything. However, this is a discussion you started!

Look at it this way: Imagine I walk up to someone and declare that my first impressions of Google Wave have not been overwhelmingly positive. They tell me that actually, Google Wave is a great tool, but it's probably better as a business tool. I tell them I don't care what they think, I was just telling them what I think. And I don't really care what they think of what I think!

Granted, some might view Google Wave as far more interesting than a single feature of Twitter. But what interests me may not interest the next person, and vice versa. I am curious to find out how people use Twitter lists. And I am quite happy to discuss the pros and cons. If this doesn't interest you - that's fine - but then why blog about it?

Am I missing something really obvious here?

Just so you know: comments are very welcome, and I do care what you have to say.

How to make the most of Follow Friday

Ben — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 17:30:00 -0500

Don't just list names for Follow Friday - tell us why we should follow them!

Previously, I've explained that 8 out of 10 people dislike Follow Friday. The concept is simple: every Friday, recommend other Twitter users who others should follow. Unfortunately, it quickly becomes a mess of names with no explanation as to why we should follow them, or what would help us decide whether to make friends with those people.

As a result, I'd be surprised if many of the people who are recommended actually get any new followers. I've had a few, but almost all of them are spammers. In fact, virtually all of my recent followers are blatant spammers.

Anyway, I digress - back to Follow Friday.

Today, I noticed several people mentioning my name in their Follow Friday lists. But I was merely a name included with several other names, which makes it unlikely that I'll get many new followers as a result. As I said on Twitter:

thanks for the #followfriday mentions - but I think you should pick 1-2 names and give a reason to follow them :)

So, what's the best way to do this? Here are some examples that I posted:

names for #followfriday - @verwon makes me laugh, @rjleaman tells it like it is, @lepoque is fiercely loyal!

And then:

a few more #followfriday mentions: @_Bryony_ likes Dr Who, @Jordan_JAH RTs the best tweets, @Twitter_Tips is a godsend!

That's my list for this week. I can't promise to recommend people every week, but it does make me think that there's some mileage in the Follow Friday concept yet.

What do you think? Is this a better way to recommend people? Who would you like to recommend this week?

Do you subscribe to comments on blogs?

Ben — Thu, 29 Oct 2009 00:00:00 -0500

A few questions for today:

Do you use the "Subscribe to comments by email" option on blogs?
If you comment on a blog and someone replies, do you go back to the post to see what else was said?
Is commenting on a blog something you do no more than once per post, or do you sometimes get into discussions?

Share your thoughts in the comments below.

The cost of Twitter to your business

Ben — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 23:00:00 -0500

Well, the apparent cost, anyway:

Staff who use Twitter and other social networking sites while at work are costing UK businesses £1.38bn every year, a report has said.

(Source: BBC News)

The gist of the article is that half of the 1,460 office workers who were questioned in this survey said they used social networking sites for personal use during business hours, and many firms have not issued guidelines on the use of Twitter.

However, one statement is somewhat ambiguous:

On average those people spent 40 minutes per week on these sites.

That's quite a conservative figure really, as the "40 minutes per week" does not stipulate whether all of that time is at work or not. Furthermore, if any of it is during work hours (which I guess some of it has to be, hence the survey), I wonder how much of it is spent during breaks? In a five-day week, 40 minutes per week is just 8 minutes per day. Not much really, but I guess it adds up.

So, if we're really worried about this kind of thing, maybe we should limit some of the following things too:

Excessive coffee breaks. You don't really need it.
Excessive lunch breaks. How much time do you need?
Excessive chatting. Get on with your work!
Excessive travelling time. It's not the company's fault if your train is late. Bad employee.
Excessive toilet breaks. Just hold it in.
Excessive thinking time. Nobody really needs to stop typing, ever. Just keep going. You'll be fine.

Then again, maybe that wouldn't go down too well...

I want to set up a website. How do I do this?

Ben — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 17:06:21 -0500

I get this question a lot, usually from friends who are happy to do most of the necessary work, but don't know where to begin. I have a site that focuses on this kind of thing - The Guide to Blogging. It's focused on blogging, but will be useful for any type of website.

A quick overview

In brief, here's what you need to think about:

What is the site going to be called? Do you already have the domain name? Finding a suitable domain name can be quite time consuming, but with a little creativity, you can find some absolutely incredible domains. (I have a few that I might share once the sites have something on them.)
How should your site be organised? You need to have a very clear idea of this before you begin. Most sites will have a home page, an about page, and a contact form or just a link. You need to have some idea of what information you'd like to put on each page. You will need to write this information yourself.
How much content do you plan to have on your site? Structure is important, but many sites will want more than a few navigation links with a page of text behind each one. If you want interactivity built into your site, such as a blog, opinion polls or a custom survey, this should be mentioned at the very start.
What are your thoughts on design? e.g. logo, colour scheme, layout. Do you have any images that can be used? This is one of the toughest areas to work on, because it is very subjective. Some people have no idea what they want, but will reject every design they see. Others will have a very specific idea that they've put together in Word, Publisher or PowerPoint, but it may not be practical to build as a website. This is one area where it helps to have a few ideas, but you should be open to suggestions. If you have absolutely no idea how your site could or should look, try looking at some of the website templates at Template Monster. At this stage, you're only looking to get an idea of what can be done. Don't actually buy anything yet!
What's your budget? In many cases, I think that money needs to be discussed early on. For larger projects, a written agreement signed by both parties may be necessary. Don't feel that you have to state your maximum budget up front - but do get a quote before you agree to anything.

A comprehensive guide

If you have a bit of time to do some background reading, The Guide to Blogging provides plenty of information for your perusal.

First, I suggest you read the following: Blogging Quick Start Guide. This covers things like your domain name, web hosting, and how to link the two together.

Next, the following guides should give you an idea of what else needs to be considered before you dive in:

I can also recommend reading some web design tips, along with content writing tips. I'll be publishing more tips in the future.

Twitter tool: One Letter Off Movies

Ben — Sat, 24 Oct 2009 14:00:00 -0500

One Letter Off Movies is a site that aggregates recent Twitter posts containing the #oneletteroffmovies hashtag, and organises them by frequency.

I asked the creator of the site, Richard Clark, why people should visit. Here's what he had to say:

"It's like playing a drinking game with the entire planet, the whole of twitter has gone nuts coming up with movie names that are just one letter off and there's some serious genius at work. Join in!"

There are some pretty funny suggestions on the list. My favourites so far include Schindler's Lisp, You've Got Bail, and Gone With The Wine.

There's also a very clever aspect of this site - you can buy an export of the top movie names and potentially register some as domain names. This is an excellent opportunity - you could easily get a great domain name from this list!

Have you tweeted using this hashtag? What are your favourite movies from the list?

The problem with social bookmarking links

Ben — Sun, 18 Oct 2009 19:00:00 -0500

Stumble This! Digg This! Add to delicious! These links are quite common on the web. So what's wrong with them?

First impressions

When people see social bookmarking links, I think they usually say one of the following things:

What are those? No idea. I'll ignore them.
I already know how to submit or vote for your site.
Oh no, not more blog clutter...

If that's the case, who actually uses those links? Well, I think they're the kind of people who say one of these things:

I liked your post. I hadn't even thought of submitting it, so I'll click your social links.
Hey, 10 people already "dugg" your post. I wonder what they said.
Hmm, I wonder what this does? *click*

I think that covers most scenarios. However, I can't help thinking there are more people who say one of the first three statements than one of the last three. Also, how many people are likely to say the last one? Some people might, but if you don't know where a link goes, there's a risk that it'll do something you don't want it to do. Oh, I don't know, it might give you a huge full-screen popup ad...

Making assumptions

Adding these links makes the assumption that your readers know what the links do, or they'll be able to figure them out on their own.

To be fair, I've made assumptions in the statements I mentioned at the start of this post. Chances are, what people really say is going to vary a lot from one site to the next.

But I think it's reasonable to say that not everyone will understand the purpose of every button or link on your site. The key is to help people to understand why you've added something to your site, what it does, and how it benefits them.

A site that does it right

I think the BBC News website has got it right. Have a look at this news article to see what I mean. At the bottom of the page, you'll see some links in a box entitled, "Bookmark with". Notice the link that reads, "What are these?" This is exactly what I'm talking about - readers can easily find out what these links do without having to click them first.

So why don't more sites do something similar? Why do sites assume that we all understand what the links are for? Including a "help" link can be an extremely valuable tool for your readers.

These links are not useless

I think sites such as StumbleUpon and delicious are great. The issue lies with sites who link to these services but do not provide an explanatory link for the less tech-savvy readers to peruse.

It's one thing if you publish a highly technical blog where everyone seems to know everything - but with new sites popping up all the time, isn't there always going to be something we haven't seen before?

What do you think? Do you include these links on your site? Is it worth providing an explanation for non-technical readers?

If your post title is bland, it won't get new readers to your site

Ben — Sat, 17 Oct 2009 23:45:00 -0500

This week at CMF Ads, I developed a page where you can see the latest posts from every Publisher who enters their feed URL. You can read more about this feature on the CMF Ads Blog.

I built this to try and get members to visit each other's blogs a bit more often, and to highlight recent content across the network. When I feel like reading some new blog posts, I stop by this page and click a few of the links. It's a really good way to find new content without having to subscribe to loads of blogs.

However, some of the posts will never get a click from me, because the post titles are so bland. If I've already subscribed to a blog that provides the entire post contents in the feed, this is less of a problem - I usually see the post contents below the title anyway. But on a page such as Recent Posts, there isn't room to display the post contents beneath every post. It would create too much scrolling. Plus, I'd rather people clicked the links to view the posts on the author's blog.

Let's have a look at some of the recent post titles and see if I want to click them. Let me know if you would click any of these in the comments below.

Options for office clothing: Not bad, not exactly compelling but it does at least give me some idea of what it's about. Could be much more powerful though. I might click this.
Blogger Talks: Very short and doesn't really tell you anything. I almost want to click this to find out what it's about, but I have no idea if it's going to be a post that'll interest me.
Boca Beth: Maybe I'd know more about the meaning of this title if I was a regular reader of this blog. As I'm not, I'm left completely confused as to what it's all about.
Success Delayed: The word "success" interests me slightly, but once again I'm left feeling somewhat underwhelmed by this title.
Football became a tad more entertaining: This title isn't all that powerful, but it does give me a good idea of what to expect. So, I might click this one to read a bit more.

Honestly, there isn't much on the Recent Posts page that has a good title. This is really disappointing. There are too many posts for me to read them all, so I need to be able to glance through the list and pick out the interesting ones. Bland titles do not encourage me to click.

Would you click on any of the above posts from their title alone? Do you write good titles? Share your thoughts below!

Planning the next version of Injader

Ben — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 21:06:52 -0500

Something I like about getting the train to work is that I have plenty of time to think about my personal projects. Whether I take a laptop or just a notepad, I usually have plenty of ideas. The laptop allows me to code as I travel, although I don't always get a suitable seat, nor am I always in the mood to code every time I get on the train. Still, I do code on the train from time to time.

Today, I organised several of my ideas for Injader into a few lists, and I've been trying to think where they fit into the release cycle for the next few months. Although I have a clear idea of where I want Injader to be, the path I'll take is changing frequently. Some of the things on my list include:

Plugins.
Terminology changes.
Simplified processes.
Mapping old URLs to new ones.
Expanding the available list of URL styles.
Continuing to work on caching.
Taking advantage of PHP5.
Prioritising other feature requests.
What can be done before Injader 3, and what should come after it.

The complete list is a lot longer than this. Many of the changes I'd like to do are features, which is why I'd also like to develop a feature voter so the best ideas can be pushed to the top.

Until then, is there anything you'd like Injader to do? If you don't already use it, what might help you to give it a try?

Employers: Sort out your job requirements

Ben — Mon, 12 Oct 2009 23:00:00 -0500

Although I was very lucky to find a job in just 8 weeks of job hunting, it didn't mean that my search was particularly easy. Also, my wife is still looking for work, and is continually frustrated with how many rejections she's getting. We compared notes, and came up with the same conclusion:

An employer's requirements for a job candidate are not always consistent with what a job spec states.

Agents are very quick to state that if you're looking for a job, you have to be flexible because there are so many people in need of work. Unfortunately, it seems like the people looking for new staff are not quite as flexible as the rest of us. When I was looking for work, I remember saying this to an agent who completely agreed with me. She said it was absurd that an employer will state their requirements, get loads of suitable candidates, and either turn them all down or pull the job listing.

So what are some of the requirements that have caused problems for us?

Image by Curtis Gregory Perry.

Experience

I found a web development role that listed various requirements, and I had most of them. One of them was that I needed to have 5 years PHP experience. I only had 4 years. I was turned down on this basis. That seems odd to me - there is a big difference between 1 year and 2 years experience, but once you get to 4 or 5 years, I think it's better to look at the person as a whole before you rule them out for being 1 year short of experience.

Jobs below your level

This is to do with your experience in a certain field, and that in a tough economy, you may not be able to take a step up. In some cases, you may need to take a step down. However, you may then end up in a situation where you're overqualified for those roles, so an employer would prefer to hire someone who they can pay less. Which brings us to the next point...

Less money

Beware of jobs that promise a certain salary, but when it comes to the negotiation stage, they give you a wildly different figure - blaming the bad economy in the process. If they couldn't afford to hire you, they wouldn't be looking for staff. Be realistic and state your requirements clearly.

Conflicting information

One job I applied for turned me down because I didn't have management experience. However, the job spec clearly stated that they wanted someone who was a senior developer looking to move into a team leader role. Basically, the requirements changed, but the job spec wasn't updated. Worse still, the job spec was reposted a week later, and it still didn't request management experience. The agent confirmed to me that the requirement for management experience was still there.

Geography

It's one thing to try and take a job that's several hours away from where you live, but my wife was turned down for a job because she doesn't live in West London. I currently commute into London 5 days a week, and a lot of other people do the same. We can't all live on work's doorstep!

Stop blaming the economy for everything

Yes, it is a valid reason in some cases, but it is not the cause of every problem. Some employers are making the job market a lot tougher than it should be. There are people looking for jobs, and vacancies to be filled, but somehow the process is taking a lot longer than it should be.

Employers, stop moaning that there are no perfect candidates out there, and try taking a chance on someone who is good but maybe doesn't tick absolutely every box - you may be pleasantly surprised.

Employees, tidy up your CV, keep looking for jobs, and don't let a negative response knock you off track. Job hunting can be a thoroughly demoralising process, so it's important to stay positive and not let it get the better of you.

What is AJAX?

Ben — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 22:00:00 -0500

Some time ago, I had a request for one of my projects:

Could you implement some AJAX? I think the system would benefit greatly.

I'm not opposed to AJAX (although I used to be), but this sounds like a case of "technology for technology's sake". What exactly should I use AJAX for? Why would I replace what's there with something that will function in much the same way? Can you justify rewriting something that works well?

What is AJAX?

It stands for Asynchronous Javascript and XML. In layman's terms, "AJAX" is usually used to describe functionality that can do what it needs to do without reloading the page. For instance, instead of posting a comment and being taken to a results page that says "thanks for your comment", the comment could post in the background, and a status message would appear on the current page instead of taking you away from the current page.

When is AJAX useful?

There are situations where AJAX makes perfect sense. It's one thing to say "look what I can do in AJAX", when it's something you could also do without AJAX. But when you build a better interface that's faster and easier to use due to the implementation of AJAX, that's when you're using it in the right way.

Isn't it difficult?

Not if you use xajax, which simplifies matters considerably.

So - back to that opening quote.

Asking someone to "make this a bit more AJAX-y" is an odd request. The best approach is to take a step back, and review whichever process is particularly time consuming or error-prone due to the number of steps it requires. This is a good way to review whether a different method might improve usability. This is one area where I think AJAX really excels. I'm just not keen on using it when it seems like the end goal is to make a site look "cool". In some cases, you can over-complicate your site with gratuitous over-use of "flashy" technologies.

I think it pays to learn a few different technologies, and use the best tool for the job - instead of just using the same tool for absolutely everything.

Odd happenings on the train and Tube

Ben — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 21:19:14 -0500

When I first started working in London back in July, travelling to work seemed to be fairly smooth.

But the last few weeks have suddenly become really bad. I don't know what's going on at the moment. First, someone drove into a railway bridge at Haslemere. Then on the same day, there was a line-side fire at Waterloo. A few days later, someone else drove into a railway bridge. You'd think that they would have heard about the first incident!

Last week, a train caught fire at Guildford station, causing the station to be closed for about an hour. Today, part of the Bakerloo line was closed, and the fire brigade were called in. Yesterday, there was a "passenger incident" at Charing Cross, and the Underground train sat at the platform for 5-10 minutes. Wonder what the incident was?

Then we have the strange abbreviations appearing on the Bakerloo line, as noted by Andph112. I think it could be a Tube bug. Maybe caused by swine flu.

I'm starting to wonder if the "allow plenty of time for check-in" at airports will soon be said about trains, too...

What do you think? Do you commute to work? How are you finding it?

Do you know where a shortened URL will take you?

Ben — Sun, 04 Oct 2009 20:15:56 -0500

In 10 reasons why Twitter sucks, I listed a few of Twitter's downsides. One item in particular deserves special attention:

Malware does a worryingly good job of hiding behind shortened links.

To keep within the 140 character limit, most URLs are shortened. That's all well and good, but what if someone posts a link to something dodgy? I guess you can't always see from the URL, but a shortened URL makes the situation a lot more dangerous. Also, it allows people to post links that are nothing short of deceptive. Have a look at this example:

An interesting comment, and it wouldn't surprise me if the link went to a blog post that discusses this point further.

Not so. Here's where it really goes:

I've deliberately removed the person's name from both screenshots. Basically, what appears to be an informative link is a deceptive link to get Pro Membership at a site called TweetTycoon. The ?e= on the end of link had the person's username on the end.

Of course, it's quite possible that this person entered their Twitter username and password on a site that is now spawning spammy tweets without their knowledge, but somehow I doubt it - otherwise, that person's username would not be in the referral link. It looks deliberate to me.

The moral of the story? The "ShortURL Preview" box is invaluable for determining where a shortened link really goes. TweetDeck has this feature. I suggest you use it, and be careful what you click!

Injader featured at CMS Wire

Ben — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 21:27:53 -0500

I've just noticed that Injader has been featured over at CMS Wire. Currently, CMS Wire has 8829 subscribers - that's a lot of exposure!

I particularly like the following comment:

... upgrades have appeared at a staggering rate, with a number of upgrades incorporating v2.3.1 and up, coming out over this summer alone.

The sites built with Injader focus on easy navigation, and easy use of plugins, templates and permissions. This is, as it says on the logo, content management for everyone.

This is the first time a large blog has ever mentioned Injader, let alone dedicated a post to it. I'm extremely grateful for the post. Thanks, CMS Wire!

A week in first class

Ben — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 22:47:36 -0500

After a few weeks of getting the train to work, I wondered what it would be like to travel in First Class. I looked into the cost, and while it was quite a bit more money, I decided to give it a try for one week.

So, what was it like?

Before you even get on the train, it's hard to ignore the sharp increase in price. Buying a 7 day First Class ticket cost me 70% more than the equivalent standard class ticket. While you do get an increase in quality, I wouldn't say it's a 70% increase. It's more like a 45% increase. I do think it would be more worthwhile if the price hike wasn't quite so high. Then again, more people would use First Class if it was more affordable, which would probably defeat the purpose.

On the other hand, I was really quite surprised how infrequently a ticket collector came through the train. Granted, they don't always come through, but you'd expect them to check the First Class passengers at least. I'm sure there were a couple of people who came into First Class just because they felt like it, not because they bought the ticket. Since I returned to Standard Class, I've definitely seen a few people get up from their seats to go into First Class - just because they can. Perhaps you think it's OK to do this, but I don't. If you don't have a First Class ticket, don't sit in First Class!

The amount of seats depends on the train. On the morning train, there were two small sections, each with 24 seats. It's not as empty as I thought it would be, though - on a typical day, 15 people were in there (including me). In the evening, some of the trains had much larger sections for First Class passengers, which were nicer than the morning ones.

The seats are a bit comfier. They recline - but I didn't try that out. The seats are a bit more spaced out, with more leg room. All of the seats are in pairs - there are no groups of three. Every seat has a tray or a table. This is much better than some of the seats elsewhere in the train. I guess you are more likely to get a seat, but apparently there are still no guarantees unless you make a reservation.

There are a few accessories. Mains power is handy if you have a laptop, although I can usually get away with not charging mine. There are curtains - handy if the sun's in your eyes. There are lights above the seats - good for reading in the dark, but not all that necessary when it's light outside. Maybe in the winter.

I was almost expecting to be offered drinks, especially as you do pay quite a bit extra, but it didn't happen on my journey. Not that it was a very long journey (just under 40 minutes each way).

Overall, it's quite a nice experience. It feels like you're on a plane, except you're on a train. There's a bit more leg room and a few nice extras. But it's really not worth paying 70% more.

Content or design - which is more important?

Ben — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 23:05:01 -0500

If content is king, where does that leave design?

Perhaps some sites spend too much time on the design, and not enough time on the content. But all too many sites use a default theme, which doesn't make them stand out amongst all the other sites using the same theme.

I think that a visually appealing site can be a lot more inviting than a disorganised mess. Maybe a plain site won't cause major grief, but a really poor design can drive visitors away, no matter how good your content is.

In my opinion, a great design can grab someone's attention, while great content is what keeps their attention.

What do you think?

7 quick tips from my Twitter feed

Ben — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 22:50:01 -0500

Twitter is a great place to post handy hints and tips. One problem is that it takes a while to go through them all. As a result, I've decided to collate some of my latest tweets for you to read in one place. Here goes...

Always leave a good tweet on your Twitter profile before going offline.
Write more blog posts than you have the time to promote. Promote the best, let the rest gain momentum naturally.
Writing blog posts on the train is a great way to build up a stock of spare posts.
Scheduling blog posts is a good idea. Do it every weekend, let the posts roll out through the week, rinse and repeat.
Musicians generally put their music on their website. That's fine, but do us all a favour and DON'T make it autostart!
If you run a forum or a blog, learn what spam looks like. Don't leave spam links up - you may get a penalty (and it looks bad).
When you don't have much time, make sure you spend time on the most important things!

Do you post tips on Twitter? Share your best ones in the comments below.

Banning all blog comments? Well, I'm not going to...

Ben — Mon, 31 Aug 2009 21:18:07 -0500

I've just been reading the following post: Ban: Comments, where Wogan May explains why he has disabled comments on his blog. I'll get to that in a moment, but first let's backtrack a little.

Wogan is someone who has commented on my blog in the past, and I've commented on his. As far as I can recall, we've both had a respectable comments section on our blogs. Maybe he's started to receive some negative comments that didn't make it onto the blog, I don't know.

I recently left a comment on his post, Adios, Ubuntu. I read most of the comments that had been posted before mine, and I thought it was an interesting discussion. Several people suggested ways to deal with the issues that Wogan outlined in the post. I fully understand that there comes a time when you just say look, I've already made my mind up, so while I appreciate your views - please don't try and talk me out of this. (note: this is a hypothetical comment from me - not a direct quote)

But unless I missed a major turn of events, I'm not sure I agree with the sudden removal of the comments section on that post, only to be replaced with the following:

Edit: Comments closed. Going round and round in circles, saying the same things in different words does not amount to conversation. End of line.

I think this is a shame, but it's the blogger's choice how they run their blog.

Still, I can safely say I will not be banning comments on my blogs. To explain my views further, let's have a look at the key arguments in the Ban: Comments post.

The comment field has a downside: People can just as equally post the most absurd rubbish, slander and hate on your webpage, degrading your work, your image, and maybe even your reputation (online and off). The issue here isn’t solved by ownership. Sure, you wrote the post, and loads of other people commented, so you’re not responsible for their content, right? Wrong. It's your garden. You make it pretty, you look after it, and if other people come along and crap in it, are you going to leave it there?

I'm really curious as to whether Wogan has had some bad experiences on his own blog, or whether he's making his decision based on the things he's seen on other people's blogs. Either way, I don't see a lot of comments along these lines. Maybe it's how you write. Or what you write about. Or it's just pure luck whether the "hate" commenters find your site, let alone take the time to tell you what they think of it. Even if they do, why not deny those comments?

I've run into SO MANY YouTube videos that I've so desperately wanted to share with my contacts and colleagues. I get about halfway to posting the link before I read the comments. If you've spent more than 3 days on YouTube, you know what those comments are like.

This is a strange argument. Sharing a video is very different to sharing a post from your own blog. I have seen the comments on YouTube, and most of the time, the worst comments are marked as spam and therefore hidden unless you specifically open them. I guess you might see the comments before they're marked as spam, so that's a fair point. But I'm not sure how relevant it is to most blogs, as YouTube probably gets a lot more visitors than most of our blogs do.

Some of the post is contradictory. Take the following statements:

Oh, but the solution's simple: Let owners filter it out. Ok, maybe not *that* simple, especially if you're stuck with a public arena like Twitter, where you can't delete other people's tweets, or posting in a forum where you can only delete your root posts, and nothing else.

Yes, they linked to you, mentioned you by name, tore you down in public, but they did it in their garden. Not in yours. Who's dealing with the sewage now? Who actually looks like the dimwit in this scenario?

It's not simple to filter out content in a public arena like Twitter. But if someone attacks you on their own blog, you can't filter that out either. Also, what if they aren't posting "sewage" and they're posting constructive feedback that isn't intended to be an attack, just an alternative viewpoint? Well, maybe that's not so bad - but if that's the case, it doesn't quite explain why comments should be removed entirely.

The added bonus in all of this is that if people are forced to respond from their own gardens (instead of leaving post-it notes all over yours) they might take more care to nurture their gardens, maybe sprout ideas of their own.

This is a good point. But I don't feel it should only be seen as an added bonus. Encouraging people to blog about something on their own blog is a really good idea. I'm just not sure that closing the comments field is the best way to do this. What if the reader doesn't have a blog? What if their views can be summed up much more easily in a quick comment on your site? Why force them to effectively link to your site, write a very short reply and provoke a chain of similar posts, when they would be much easier to follow in a series of comments on one blog?

Sure, having more links to your site is a good thing in itself, but I'd rather link because I had a decent amount of thoughts to convey in my reply - than be forced to link every time I want to make a comment.

As for blocking comments due to people who abuse them - don't let the bad apples spoil the bunch.

I'd be interested to hear what you think about closing comments on your blog - have you done it? Why/why not?

PS: I'd just like to point out that this post is only meant as constructive criticism. This is one example where it is definitely better to write on my own blog than to write a really long comment on someone else's blog. But I'd rather make that decision on my own.

Javascript and IE8: Focus and click

Ben — Sat, 29 Aug 2009 10:14:16 -0500

On one of the sites I support, there is a toolbar with a few text boxes and search buttons. You click in the text box, type a number and hit Enter. They are just regular buttons though, rather than "submit" buttons on a form.

Until recently, this worked fine. However, in IE8 it doesn't seem to work. There is a row of buttons just above the text boxes, and when you hit Enter while in a text box, it appears to set the focus to the first button. The focus was already there, but the border around the button gets slightly thicker as the form is submitted.

Here's the code I originally wrote:

I have included the button code to give some context for the problem.

The text box captures the keypress event. The event.keyCode == 13 code checks whether you pressed Enter, and if so, it clicks the button. But in IE8, for some reason it submits the form based on the button that already has the current focus.

Thinking about this problem logically, it seems like we should be able to solve this problem by setting the focus to the search button before clicking it. So if we add a line here:

    if (event.keyCode == 13) {
      document.getElementById('jumptocustomer').focus();
      document.getElementById('jumptocustomer').click();
    }

It should fix it. Sure enough, this did fix the problem, and works in both IE8 and Firefox.

It's probably good practice to set the button focus first anyway. But wouldn't you expect the browser to understand "click this button", and not use a different button instead?

At any rate, the problem is solved. Perhaps this might be of use to someone else.

Why most blogs don't take off

Ben — Thu, 27 Aug 2009 20:07:12 -0500

How many blogs have you followed since their early days that are still growing now?

A lot of the blogs I used to read have disappeared or stopped posting. There are people who started blogging before me, and who still blog today - and there are new bloggers who pop up all the time. But how long will they keep blogging?

I've covered this problem before. In Where are all the bloggers? 10 possibilities, I look at the reasons why people stop blogging. In the not-so-constructive post, 10 signs your blog sucks, I list some of the worst aspects of blogs.

These posts alone do not answer the question: why do some blogs never take off?

Being a brand new blogger is an exciting experience for a lot of people. Perhaps for the first time, they have a place to air their views, share their experiences, or bestow their expertise on an as-yet unknown audience. But once the newness wears off, blogging can feel like a chore.

Soon, the blogger starts making excuses, and neglects their blog. They might even stop blogging because they think nobody is reading. The problem is that readers do not usually show up on day 1 without any promotional effort from the blogger. To build a long-term audience, you need a few things:

Knowledge: you have to know what you're talking about. It will soon become apparent if you don't. Write what you know!
Passion: you need to enjoy blogging if you plan to be around for a while. Write what you like!
Perseverence: do you give up at the first hurdle? Well, your blog might not be around for very long then. Blogging isn't always easy.

I recently noticed that benbarden.com has reached 500 subscribers, and Top Ten Blog Tips has reached 400 subscribers. How? For all of the above reasons! I know what I want to blog about (and I know my choice of subject). I like what I write. And I keep at it.

There are many other reasons why a blog may or may not be successful, but I think the key is to build a site that people want to visit. Keep writing if you want to keep people reading.

What do you think?

Road safety double-standard for cyclists

Ben — Fri, 21 Aug 2009 20:00:00 -0500

There have been various articles about cyclists killed in London, avoiding danger as a cyclist, and how you can still be in danger if you follow the road rules. That third article is definitely worth reading - it certainly addresses the question of "who was at fault?"

However, there's a very important point to raise - you can still be in danger if you follow the road rules. Now, what about if you don't follow the rules? What are your chances then?

I ask this because I travel into London five days a week and I see a lot of cyclists who seem to think a red light is something they can ignore. As a pedestrian, if the green man is showing and the traffic has a red light, I should be able to cross the road safely. Obviously I will always look both ways and take care to avoid any unexpected traffic (especially the emergency services), but I have had several near-misses with cyclists who see a red light and just keep on riding.

Before you complain about how drivers behave around cyclists, make sure you are cycling safely!

Autoplaying audio can be an accessibility issue

Ben — Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:00:00 -0500

Several years ago, I learned the initial version of the Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) due to being involved with the company intranet (this was in a previous role). The guidelines are now quite old, so a newer version has been published: WCAG 2.0.

There are several differences, but one point stands out:

We discourage the practice of automatically starting sounds (especially if they last more than 3 seconds), and encourage that the sound be started by an action initiated by the user after they reach the page, rather than requiring that the sound be stopped by an action of the user after they land on the page.

From "Understanding Success Criterion 1.4.2".

So, it seems as though autoplaying audio is not just frowned upon, it is now viewed as a potential accessibility issue.

A good sense of direction?

Ben — Wed, 12 Aug 2009 21:28:40 -0500

Image by luthor522.

It’s all too easy to dive into your work head first without doing any kind of planning.

But if you don’t establish a direction before you start, how will you know where to go, how to get there, and what to look out for along the way? More to the point, will you ever get to where you want to be, and will you even know whether you’re done or not?

Good requirements are vital

Let's say you're a job agency who has been asked to fill a position. A good agent will look at their database of CVs and attempt to find a match for the job they're trying to fill. For instance, someone who primarily develops in PHP might not be the best candidate for a Javascript role. Having a clear idea of what skills are needed and what type of person would suit the role is vital if you're going to come up with someone who fits the requirements. Of course, to do this you need a detailed job spec.

Now consider a software development project with lots of requirements, but not all of them have been agreed yet. With so much work to do, you want to make a start, but there's a chance that something might come up later that means you have to rework some of the things you've already done. Perhaps if you knew all of the requirements up front, you could develop the project with everything in mind, and work on several changes together. This not only ensures that the changes work in conjunction with each other, it can also save you some time.

So how do you stay focused and organised on your projects?

Using a five-step approach

1. Identify the task. What are you going to do? It's important to write a clear objective, otherwise you won't have a goal that you can work to without significant difficulties. For now, just get the basic task written down. The detail gets added next.

2. Plan and research. How will you get the job done? For starters, larger projects will need to be broken down into multiple objectives. If you were going to write a new blogging system, for instance, a bad objective would be "Develop a new blogging system". You’ll get sick of not being able to tick the item off your list, and it will just not get done. Having a list of tasks that need to be done is vital before you go any further. Establish a clear sequence of events, identify dependencies, and add in some milestones.

3. Do the job. For a development project, this means writing the code. It's quite likely you'll add in some extra layers of detail prior to commencing this stage. The main thing to be careful about is not to code until you know what you're doing, why you're doing it, and how you're doing it. If you broke the task down into clear objectives, the code should be all the easier to write.

4. Quality control. Test, test, test. Don't do all the work then review it at the end. Test as you go. With software, this doesn’t mean "check it works". It means break it, then fix it. You want to find all the bugs at this stage, not later on. Code, test, re-code, re-test, and so on. And get someone else to help with the testing.

5. Implement and review. Just because the task is complete, doesn't mean your job is done. Post-project support and keeping in contact with the customer is really important. Keep an eye out for any new issues, and fix them. Ask for new requirements so you can build on what you've already put together. Ask for feedback on how the project went. Document your findings and decide if there's anything you would do differently in future. There's always something new to learn, something to improve on, and another job to do. Ensure you establish a routine of continuous improvement.

Anyway, that's enough from me - do you know where you're headed before you set off? Do you keep improving your methods?

Why use noindex?

Ben — Sun, 09 Aug 2009 13:46:38 -0500

Over at WebProNews, there's a post entitled Bing indexing noindex/nofollow content. A few of the comments raise the following point:

I'm curious, why would a webmaster not want content indexing?

If the motivation behind the use of noindex comes from the question "do I want people to read this page?" then I agree with the comments on the post - consider if the post should be online at all.

But I think there's a very clear benefit. We need to look beyond the realms of the content, and look at the functionality on the website.

Does your site have its own search engine? If so, you don't want other search engines to index pages in your search engine. I've seen this before - one search engine searches another. This might seem like a way to have your site appearing in a lot of search engine results, but the possibilities are endless. It's not a particularly worthwhile listing to have.

I'm not sure if this is a problem if you use Google custom search for your site, as Google should be able to recognise that it shouldn't index its own search pages.

As for how to prevent your own search engine from being searched by other search engines... I don't actually use noindex. Instead, I use a robots.txt file. For Injader, I do this:

User-agent: *
Disallow: /search.php

Can you think of any other uses for having content online, but not allowing it to be indexed?

Does FriendFeed devalue feed subscribers?

Ben — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 15:32:39 -0500

Image by GeekMom Heather.

A few weeks ago, I heard that FeedBurner has started counting the number of FriendFeed subscribers in all RSS statistics. FriendFeed is a handy way to keep up with content from several different places, including blogs and Twitter posts.

I registered at FriendFeed, and added all of my blogs. Sure enough, within a matter of days, my feed subscribers skyrocketed. I don't have the exact before and after figures, and some of the sites would have grown a bit anyway, but here's a rough idea of how two of my blogs changed after I joined FriendFeed:

benbarden.com - Before FriendFeed: 160 subscribers - After FriendFeed: 339 subscribers

toptenblogtips.com - Before FriendFeed: 203 subscribers - After FriendFeed: 333 subscribers

I know what some of you will be thinking - if you're not already a member, maybe it's time to sign up! But if FriendFeed inflates your subscriber stats, doesn't that devalue them somewhat?

Should you show your subscriber count?

First impressions mean everything. If I visit a blog that proudly tells me it has 5 subscribers, it suggests that the blog is new and might not be around next week, or perhaps it's dead or dying. Best not to show your subscriber count when it's so small.

On the other hand, if you have 1,000 subscribers, you must be doing something right - but it could just be an indication that you're good at inflating your subscriber count.

I like to see how many subscribers a blog has, but I wouldn't suggest displaying the FeedBurner counter if you have less than 100 subscribers.

It's not the total number of subscribers...

FeedBurner doesn't tally up the total number of subscribers (at least it didn't the last time I checked). It's more to do with how many people are reading your blog on any given day. I'm not sure exactly how it works, but if 1 person subscribes and never unsubscribes, it doesn't mean you'll never have 0 subscribers.

Fluctuations can be harmful.

Let's say it's a quiet day and half of your subscribers don't check in. It's not because your blog is going downhill, it's because they don't have time today. If everyone can see that decrease, some people may think that people are unsubscribing and promptly do the same. Not good!

Also, FeedBurner has had a few sudden decreases in subscribers, which seem to rectify themselves the next day. Case in point: a while ago my blog had 150 subscribers, but dropped to 75 subscribers for one day, then jumped back up to 145 the next day. I'm not convinced it's good to show that kind of a drop to anyone who stops by.

Using Twitter as your feed reader?

I've heard a few bloggers saying that Twitter has become their feed reader. So in some ways, a Twitter follower could be viewed in a similar way to a feed subscriber.

I'm not keen on using Twitter in this way - I'd have to be online when a new post is announced, or I'd miss it. I've had days when I go onto Twitter, click a link to read a post, but as I'm reading, several other links pop up that I want to read, too. A feed reader allows me to browse the posts at my leisure, and they won't fly past while I'm reading something else.

But I wouldn't have found some of those posts by only reading the blogs I'm already subscribed to. So, I think Twitter is great for discovering new sites - it's just not what I'd use to keep up with the latest posts from a blog that I enjoy reading. I'd much rather subscribe to it, as that way I won't miss any posts.

So is a FriendFeed subscriber the same as a feed subscriber?

Some of them might be - it depends on whether you use a feed reader. If not, then I'd put similar value on both people. If someone follows me on Twitter, uses Google Reader but doesn't want to subscribe to my blog, then I don't think they should be included in my feed subscriber stats.

You see, I have multiple blogs, all of which are on FriendFeed - and if someone subscribes to my FriendFeed account, all of my FeedBurner subscriber stats will be increased accordingly. If they only want to subscribe to one or two of my blogs, why should all of my subscriber stats go up?

I'm certainly not complaining about extra subscribers appearing in my stats - but I'd rather the figure was accurate. Still, some blogs try to inflate their stats anyway, so how many people believe the stats are accurate?

What do you think? Have you noticed any sudden changes to your subscriber stats? Is there a fair way to include other metrics in your subscriber stats?

OIOpublisher still having problems with Entrecard

Ben — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 20:20:25 -0500

I've been following this saga for quite a while now, and there are still people who are having this problem.

It all started with this support forum post. The issue was reported, but in the absence of a solution, TechieGuy came up with a fix. He also blogged about how to remove the 999 credit limit. However, his solution required a modification to the database, which I wouldn't advise doing unless you're confident that you won't accidentally delete one of the core WordPress database tables. Still, it's not his product - at least he identified the cause of the problem.

That was back in January.

July 23rd, 2009 - an Entrecard user posts about the apparent inability to sell anything via OIOpublisher for more than 999 credits. That's odd... I thought it would be fixed by now.

Back to the support forum thread:

It's been fixed for a while now, although it seems that a couple of people haven't had the fix applied by the upgrade routine.

If you go to phpmyadmin, you can run the queries needed to fix the issue manually from the "SQL" tab:

Again, why are users expected to go into the database directly? Why wasn't the upgrade routine updated to apply the fix automatically?

So, in summary:

A user reported the issue.
The same user also identified the fix.
For some reason, upgrading might not actually fix the error. Users are therefore advised to go into the database and make changes to it directly.
This is not free software. You are paying to use it.

I know what it takes to build an upgrade process that can handle upgrades from one version to another, including upgrades that skip several versions and apply multiple database upgrades in one go. Sometimes that's not a good idea, but you can just break it into an automated step-by-step process - i.e. keep clicking next, or refresh the page, until it's done. Is it too much to ask for OIOpublisher to do something similar? Asking users to go into phpMyAdmin is not a good idea!

What do you think?