Miscellaneous musings in beta

Finally got around to compile my current flex project using Flex “Gumbo” 4 SDK (beta 4.0.0.10485) – and was in for quite a shock.

First the Spark theme is a major change. And in my humble opinion not for the better. Frankly it kinda looks like the early Java Swing Metal theme. Ugly. Furthermore it’s supposed to be simple to use. Which sounds pretty good – until you realize that this means that most of your hard-earned styles no longer work at all. They are simply not there anymore. Plus I’ve got a few events that are not happining at all anymore.

Luckily the Halo theme is still a part of the new SDK. And you can still use it. You just have to add these parameters to the compiler:

-compatibility-version=3.3 -theme=${flexlib}/themes/Halo/halo.swc

The compatibility-version parameter is exactly what it sounds like: It guarantees compatibility against older versions.

But wait. With these parameters many of the advantages of using Flex 4 goes away. One of them is Spark. Because Spark is so much more than just a theme. It’s a new component and skinning architecture, that is way better at separating the view from the controller. So I guess, that I have to take a harder look at Gumbo. New namespaces and all. This is a good place to start for the migration: http://www.adobe.com/devnet/flex/articles/flex3and4_differences.html

Or this: http://www.artima.com/articles/flex_4_styling.html

But I definitely have find another way to skin Spark…

Ever since smartphones entered the end consumer market, we’ve seen a lot of incredible things happen. In a relatively short period of time the Android and the iPhone have shattered many web habits. Ask yourself this: How do you Twitter? How do you use Gtalk or Facebook or buy movie tickets? How do you get updated on the latest news? Do you use the browser – or is there an app for that?  I bet that you’ve changed habits quite a bit. A clean app compared to a cluttered and busy web interface seems to win every time.

But that’s not all. I’m also betting that we’ve only seen the beginning. Because not many apps really utilize the processor power of your smartphone. Remember that you actually have a small and capable computer in your pocket. And then ask yourself: Would a pocket-size personal assistant be useful to you? An assistant that understands spoken language. One that acts on your command and does complex things on your behalf. Like reserve a table at your favorite restaurant or get a taxi.

It’s an very old dream, I know. But it’s also one that is on the verge of becoming a reality. Take a look at Siri. The company call their Virtual Personal Assistant the next chapter of the Web. And I think they’re right.

Siri wisely aims low and only does a few thing well. It’s really a just program tying already existing services together – probably inspired by previous personal assistant failures. But Siri is also based on DARPA funded technology as a  spin-off of the more ambitous CALO project, and it’s quite clear that Siri have more things in store as the technology matures.

As the quaint connection: The CALO project resides at SRI International. SRI is also the research institute where Douglas Engelbart made a quantum leap in human-computer interaction – and invented the mouse.

I’m fairly excited about this, I can tell you that. It’s a good time to be an A.I. Now we just need that flying car.

After Steve Jobs showcased an iPad without Flash support last week, the flame wars have been blazing. HTML 5 versus Flash is the burning question. It’s Adobe versus Apple with Google as linebacker. The proprietary plugin versus open web standards. Who will win? What will loose? This is the best blog, I’ve read so far on the subject.

However one astonishing question remains. Where is Microsoft in all this? The fact that Silverlight is rarely mentioned anywhere in this debate made me realize just how far Microsoft has gone. And how quickly.

Like it or not, Microsoft used to a big player. One of the few companies that set the standards instead of following the lead. Sure, we can always discuss the negative aspects of Microsoft’s monopoly, but no one can deny that Microsoft has been enormously influential. But apparently no longer. And today Microsoft’s creative destruction written by Dick Brass, a former vice president at Microsoft, offered a possible explanation:

What happened? Unlike other companies, Microsoft never developed a true system for innovation. Some of my former colleagues argue that it actually developed a system to thwart innovation. Despite having one of the largest and best corporate laboratories in the world, and the luxury of not one but three chief technology officers, the company routinely manages to frustrate the efforts of its visionary thinkers.

Wow. Go read it. It’s well written and thoughtful. And it is a statement made by one of Microsoft’s own. Microsoft’s rather weak answer to Brass’ statement is here.

For quite some time now open source blogs have been noting the signs of Microsofts impending doom.  To counter this many Microsoft affiliated blogs have been citing Windows 7′s record sales. But combine the above with the current financial crisis and these observations Microsoft is certainly in for some immediate hardships. At the very least.

Cityscape imagined by genius illustrator Arthur Radebaugh

Sometimes the future doesn’t look like we were promised. Something might be missing. Something might be different from what we imagined it would be. Or maybe something is just not quite there yet.

Whenever that happens we tend to get disappointed and maybe even disillusioned. If you read the many, many blog entries about the iPad, you can see the same disappointment. And yet the same people often see promise as well.

I think they’re right.

Sure. The iPad has many shortcomings. The name iPad is a misnomer. It might just be an oversized iPhone. It has no camera. It is not supporting Flash (What? No Hulu or Farmville?). It has a QWERTY keyboard (What? No futuristic alphabetic wheel?). It doesn’t do multitasking. The screen format is all wrong. The battery can’t be replaced. It’s not running Leopard OS. Et cetera.

But despite the overwhelming list of possible faults the iPad has something else. It has promise, real promise. We might actually be looking at the future of computing. Why? Because this is the first time a computer really speaks our language. It simply does computing on our terms. We don’t have to learn console or to point-and-click in a window metaphor. We don’t have to peruse manuals to do the simplest of operations. We just have to touch the damn thing. The iPad is all about the good experience of computing and browsing.

Wow.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m a geek too. I like my Debian. But the average user certainly doesn’t. And whenever I see the iPad disappointment, it’s almost always another geek writing. Geeks dislike the iPad. Why? Because of all the shortcomings mentioned above – but also because geeks sense the shift in paradigms. Whether we like it or not the future of computing looks easy somehow. All the hard parts are going to be hidden and cleverly concealed and kept away from the user. Like sleight of hand. Geeks don’t like that, sure, but the average user will. And the average user is the future.