Michael Boyle — Page 384

News.com’s article and interview

April 19, 2001 by Michael Boyle

with Dan Bricklin (The man who saved “blogging”?) is a pretty good read, overblown title and all. The interviewer manages to catch a certain spirit that I think is very real – a certain seriousness that attends Interesting Projects.

But the article is totally bizarre at the same time. Lots of nice questions about his thoughts on Blogger and the place for personal sites and small companies in the world… and then right at the end blammo: “There’s some skepticism out there about whether Microsoft can resist coming up with a lock-in regarding SOAP. Do you think the big companies will support something like XML-RPC in addition to SOAP 1.1?” An editor’s note longer than the question itself was required to give enough context to readers!

Photos via Blork

April 19, 2001 by Michael Boyle

Photos via <a href=”http://www.raggafragga.com/blork/”>Blork</a>: burnt orange is the new black. These from a fabulous party held a couple weekends ago at a loft on Dowd, featuring my (trendy) friends Ed, Fernando, and Charles.

Aislin: Bonhomme Summit

April 19, 2001 by Michael Boyle

Aislin: Bonhomme Summit. Editorial cartooning at its finest.

Wired News

April 18, 2001 by Michael Boyle

published an interesting update on Minitel today. It’s interesting to note that as the internet moves from the desktop to other devices (in addition to the desktop, this ain’t no zero-sum game), these other environments (phones, PDAs, etc.) are quite similar to what minitel has always offered. Hmmm. Back to the future indeed.

From Publish

April 18, 2001 by Michael Boyle

From Publish comes an article called Content management ready to explode (picked up as well, naturally, by Evhead). The article rings true to me, and what’s more, no one currently in the field has a lock on things. When you need a techie priesthood to run a CMS on a day-to-day basis, the CMS is pretty much beside the point – you haven’t addressed the key issue. To me, the most important issue is to overcome the workflow and work volume issues by placing publishing responsibility as close as possible to the person who is writing the original text. That person mustn’t have to be shadowed by a CMS tech at each step, either.