How’s this for derivative inspiration? This post is a reaction to John Gruber’s summary of the New York Times’ preview of the new Apple “Device”

Apple seems to serve the will of its customers. It recognizes that customers will find a way to get desired content with the least amount of friction possible. With music they adopted the download behavior of their customers, but monetized it in a fashion that replaced existing illegal and non-monetized methods.

Usually industry execs in the “media sphere” tend to come from that world, and see things only through that lens. They view their customers as criminals always trying to find a way to steal from them. Apple views their customers as Gods, because for a very long time they had so few.

This isn’t to say that Apple pulls a Microsoft or HP and focus groups the hell out of a product. Apple makes products they and their families would like to use and be proud of—that’s a focus group with accountability.

Sure Jobs has a bit of a diva complex and an RDF, but in some weird cosmic way, his pride is actually one of his best assets, contagious but not at all toxic. Think about Pixar. Jobs bought the company from George Lucas and hired people who had a passion for telling stories they could be proud of. Pride in the Jobsian sense is something for which you’re willing to put your name on the line and share it with those close to you. I mean, there’s a reason why Pixar ends their credits with a list of “production babies”; Pixar movies are a family affair from conception to completion to consumption.

If only normal CEO pride was this burdened with humility, and not ego[1]. Bill Gates is probably the only other industry exec that gets it. Sadly it didn’t happen with Microsoft (too big to fail?), but you see it every day in Gates’ foundation work. He’s proud of his work, of his team, and the legacy he’s leaving behind.

Simply, pride for these two men can be distilled into the question: “have I helped make the world a better place?”

1. – This, again, is not to say Jobs or Gates lack ego. They have plenty to go around. It’s just used appropriately: to do well by their customers and by their legacy.

Post from JoshHemsath.com

Why Steve Jobs’ pride is an asset

I think the word Grant McCracken is searching for is Trust. Leaders need to Trust the people they work with, and everything else falls in to place. If you trust that your teammates will make the best decision, and that it’s their reputation on the line (as well as the org’s), chances are they’ll err towards authenticity.

The lack of trust leads to corporate mandates: the minimum flair, the customer service guidelines, the… failed decisions of an executive body out of touch with their audience.

I think we can get back to trust when we shrink the size of the organization. Large organizational bodies trend toward mandates, SOPs, memos, and bureaucratic bullshit. Smaller organizations have to trust everyone on board, also removing anonymity. Mediocre people thrive on the anonymity of a large organization; the ability to do the bare minimum, follow and blame the rules, and clock out at the end of the day appeals to those of us who don’t want to deal.

As a customer, I’ll trust the employee who rolls her eye at the corporate “bon homie” and makes a decision on my behalf, before the employee who flashes his Cheshire smile.

Who would you trust?

Post from JoshHemsath.com

Trust and Authenticity

Post from JoshHemsath.com

Hot Sauce & Oatmeal – Playlist for October 9

I DJ a radio show called Hot Sauce & Oatmeal Fridays at midnight (Mountain Standard Time) on KGLT 91.9 FM. Every week I play clips from cult classic movies in between sets at the top and bottom of the hour.

So I have a challenge for you.

If you can be the first person to correctly identify 3 of the films, you get to pick a three song set. Pending of course I have access to the music, it’s not metal (I have to be able to listen to it), and it’s safe for the yungn’s ears. If I have the music, I’ll give you credit and play your set tonight. If not, next week. Deal?

Give me a ring-a-ling if you think you’ve got it. And you have to call in tonight. (406) 994-HIYA (4492). I’ll even keep a running tally if you want to call in when you hear it.

Fine Print: The show opening clip doesn’t count.

Post from JoshHemsath.com

New contest tonight on Hot Sauce & Oatmeal

Post from JoshHemsath.com

Hot Sauce & Oatmeal – Playlist for October 2

The news: after apprenticing last spring at KGLT 91.9 FM, Bozeman’s only freeform public radio station, I applied for and was assigned to the Friday night “bar shift” show.

What does this mean? Every Friday, from Midnight to 3 a.m. (Mountain Time), I’ll be massaging your ears with a mix of electro-pop/hop/rock and some music to help you sleep.

What’s the title about? I’m known for my love of the oat–it’s a great tool to help me wake up, or go to sleep. On its own it can be pretty mellow, but with enough doctoring oatmeal can be better than the best cereal Kashi puts out.

I’m hoping to kick it up a notch.

Stay tuned, make requests, give me feedback. The show is yours, just as much as it is mine.

I promise to let you know what I play, let you know what I’m excited to introduce on the program, and give you some “behind-the-scenes” insight into late night radio.

Now I leave you with some of my inspiration to take this show–Wolfman Jack in American Graffiti.

Post from JoshHemsath.com

New this week: Hot Sauce & Oatmeal on KGLT.net

Kitchen Timer by LynGi

Why does length of story indicate whether something is a feature, or conversely a pedantic blurb?

Why does frequency of publication matter?

When we set out to write, shouldn’t we write about the things that matter to us?

At that point, shouldn’t we write for however long it takes to cover the story?

My concerns stem from several sources: experts on blogging say that you have to continually publish something to maintain an audience, Dan Lyons (a.k.a. Fake Steve Jobs) whining about having to write a hundred-word feature, and reading about the 13,000 word megastory on the Health Care Crisis that will probably only get read by people who are already acolytes for the cause.

However on the other side of the issue is the web’s creativity guru Merlin Mann telling us that it doesn’t take much to tell a compelling story (so long as that’s the goal), or web standard savant Jeffery Zeldman challenging us to combat the blogosphere’s noise by writing when we’re inspired.

The great thing about media in an on-demand world, is that it’s just that: on demand. We don’t need to write to fill space or talk to fill time. We tell our stories when it’s time for them to be told, with the intent to give them the focus they need.

I guess we could think about it this way– which is more compelling: a poem that alludes to emotion and the specific, or a 5-page paper that stumbles over itself in an attempt to fill space. If we want to get more practical and less academic, try this on for size again: a politician who is unequivocal in his answer of “Yes, No, or Maybe” to a direct question, or a candidate who distracts from the issue and rambles on for three minutes until the timer changes color.

I feel that I write best when I have something to say, or I’m addressing an issue that went unaddressed. I communicate at my worst when I ramble to fill 5 minutes, or because I need to post “something” to maintain consistent web traffic, or because a columnist didn’t submit their article leading me to use unsound logic while relying on polemic arguments or ad hominem attacks.

However, deadlines and constraints are mostly good. They force leaders to answer the question. They make designers, writers, creators, craftsmen churn out usable products or unexpected solutions. Garr Reynolds and Nancy Duarte, “presentation” experts, have often said that more managers need to think like designers because they can think best within constraints, communicate at the audience’s level, and focus on the essentials of the idea (making them concrete).

As with most things, it comes down to the spirit vs. the letter of the principle or law. Deadlines become misused when writers who have nothing to write about end up writing about nothing in order to meet the monthly, weekly, daily, or hourly deadline. Constraints become abused by students, teachers, debate moderators, anchors, and producers when we write to fill space, talk to fill time (or don’t talk long enough), resulting in rambling papers or vague and abstract soundbites that are essentially hot air.

I could offer a conclusion because that’s the expected format, or let you draw your own conclusion.

• What are other examples of how we abuse or misuse constraints?
• How can we combat meaningless noise, and give quality the legs needed to stand?

Post from JoshHemsath.com

Short enough to be interesting, long enough to cover the subject

Recently, I visited an office and was asked for some thoughts on MediaWiki’s value as a tool for collaborative editing. Surprised by the question, because I had been thinking about it recently, I probed a little bit more to discover his project’s requirements.

<some background>

Wikipedia propelled the term “wiki” into the public consciousness, however, wiki is internet slang for software that allows for online collaborative editing. Whether or not you know it, you’ve used MediaWiki every day (I’d be shocked if you didn’t). MediaWiki is the software originally developed to power Wikipedia, but has since been released as free, open source software for anyone to use and customize. The major drawback for “the rest of us” is that we don’t often have access to our own server to self-host, or we don’t have the patience to learn how to implement the software. If PHP, CSS, MySQL, and FTP intimidate or bore you, then self-hosting a wiki is probably not your best option.

</some background>

So let’s assume you’re like this person who’s working on an extensive project (multi-faceted document, a virtual binder, whatever), that needs to be kept secret, but multiple people need to be editing it. And, you don’t have the capacity to deploy your own MediaWiki (despite how familiar it is, it probably is overkill, too).

• What kinds of hosted Wiki software are available?
• What are their benefits and drawbacks to this project?
• How much do they really cost?

1. Writeboard

• Benefits: Simple. Password protected access. Easy to invite other participants. If project requirements grow, can integrate with other 37 Signals apps (like Basecamp, Highrise, or Backpack)
• Drawbacks: Not thoroughly exhaustive enough for enterprise deployments. Limiting formatting options, and you can’t upload or manage documents. Can’t self-host/integrate with an intranet.
• True Cost: 100% Free. 100% Hosted.

2. Google Sites

• Benefits: Gives users the ability to make password-protected/invite-only sites that are completely customizable with a suite of Google widgets. When you need to do more than just edit a document, and create a hosted company “intranet” or handbook, this is for you.
• Drawbacks: Editing Google Sites is a bit cumbersome, and allows you to edit probably more than you should. Almost like a glorified homepage editor (e.g. the late GeoCities).
• True Cost: 100% Free. 100% Hosted.

3. PBworks

• Benefits: Full suite of options. Different editions for different needs (legal edition gets you an audit trail). Very professional. Most of the pay-to-play options are things that make sense for enterprises but maybe not individuals or small organizations.
• Drawbacks: It’s difficult to find which edition works for you, and hard to find the “free” version. Once you do, you realize that all the features you might need or were counting on, like access control, cost you something. Basic users will have their wikis visible to the world, if that’s what they want.
• True Cost: “Basic” edition is free (and is very basic). The version comparable to Google Sites or some of the features on Writeboard costs you $96/user (and it isn’t clear if this is per month or year).

4. Etherpad

• Benefits: Good for the basic user, who just wants to create a no-frills reference document. Interface is clean and easy to understand. Like the upcoming Google Wave, all updates to the document are shown in real-time. Pretty slick if you and your team are working on a deadline, and don’t want to step on each other’s toes.
• Drawbacks: Only gives you basic email formatting (bold, italic, lists, colors, and sizes). Again, access control costs you something, so all your free wikis are naked.
• True Cost: $8/user per month (after 3 users). The free version only gives you a randomized URL to control access, providing the opportunity for anyone to edit.

5. WikiSpaces

• Benefits: A ton of features. Embeddable widgets like Google Calendars, file management (up to 2 GB), page histories, and email or RSS notifications make this a pretty full featured application.
• Drawbacks: Security and wiki customization, however, come at a price ($5/user per month or $50/year). Cheaper than most, this still makes it difficult to do your work in private, or without the distraction of banner/text ads.
• True Cost: $50/year sans eavesdroppers. Free if you don’t mind banner ads and visitors.

What am I missing? What do you use?

Post from JoshHemsath.com

5 Free Hosted Wikis and their true cost

This conversation took a spin that I wasn’t prepared for, in that despite me being an advocate for “thinking outside the box”, our friend asked me to “close my eyes, and tell me where you see yourself in 10 years”. I replied with some statement on the type of job or work that I’d like to be doing.

“Open your eyes,” he says. “You’re thinking too hard. Let’s do word association: I say black–”

“White?” I reply after pausing for a moment.

“You’re thinking before you answer,” he says. “Josh. You’re censoring yourself. I’m asking you to dream, and give me a picture of the kind of life you’d like to have in 10 years. Let’s try this again. Close your eyes, sit on that mountain top, and tell me where you see yourself.”

I close my eyes, pull the burlap sack off my imagination, and start describing what I see. “Flying on an airplane to Paris, taking the Chunnel to London, running for the Anchorage School Board.”

“We don’t dream enough,” he tells me. “We get caught up with what we can’t do, that it keeps us from dreaming about what we could do. I can only work around obstacles if I’m helping you get somewhere.”

I haven’t been able to stop thinking that when I dream, it’s vocational in nature. What kind of job I’ll have, what kind of salary, who will I be working for, what projects I’d like to develop.

If I stop for a moment, take the burlap sack off my head, close my eyes, and describe what I see things start to fall into place. If I want to do something, I’ll know where I’m going, what I need to do to get there, and who I’ll need to work with.

• What haven’t you done because a burlap sack was still covering your imagination?
• What do you see when you close your eyes?
• Where do you see yourself?
• What are your dreams?

Post from JoshHemsath.com

“We don’t dream enough”

This raises some questions for me.

• How do you make polls, forums, and other forms of community interaction work?
• How do you make community interaction relevant to your organization, blog, or website?
• When is community interaction actually useful?

Post from JoshHemsath.com

Crowdsourcing: how do you make online interactivity work?