Is WordonWiki a wiki?

March 8th, 2010

The original article of Ward Cunningham defines a wiki as "The simplest online database that could possibly work.". There is also a longer version that goes as follows:

Wiki is a piece of server software that allows users
to freely create and edit Web page content using any Web browser.
Wiki supports hyperlinks and has a simple text syntax
for creating new pages and crosslinks between internal pages on the fly.

Wiki is unusual among group communication mechanisms in that
it allows the organization of contributions to be edited in addition to the content itself.

Like many simple concepts, "open editing" has some profound and subtle
effects on Wiki usage. Allowing everyday users to create and edit any
page in a Web site is exciting in that it encourages democratic use of
the Web and promotes content composition by nontechnical users.

We've read with interest this definition and verified if we could match WordonWiki to this definition. For the simple definition we could match that definition certainly. As indicated in previous posts, this software was developed out of a personal need. Textile or wysiwyg wikis simply did 'not work' for we wanted it to do.

The longer definition is more explicit. All things like on the fly creation of pages and links between pages are well supported by WordonWiki. We're not sure how to read the requirement of a 'page revision history' in the definition, but this is 'de rigeur' in today's wiki systems.

Where WordonWiki deviates from the pure form of the definition, is the 'edit Web page content using any Web browser' requirement. While WordonWiki certainly supports easy editing, it does not use 'the browser' for the editing process. Rather it uses the browser to trigger the editing process.

Purists have told us that we don't qualify as a pure wiki, exactly for this reason. However, we have argued that other wiki's also would not fit. There are a number of features that today are taken for granted, but that would disqualify a wiki taking this strict definition into account:

  • Login required for read or edit
  • Page templates
  • File attachments

The truth is that this definition which dates back to 1994 is, while visionary and extremely helpful to define the concept of a wiki, currently a bit outdated. We need to go beyond the original definition and look what makes the wikis of today work:

  • Create content that is easy to navigate and edit by all its authorized users.
  • Edits can always be reverted.
  • It is easy to create new pages and create links between pages.

There is no direct reason a wiki should be accessible through a browser, however as long as we don't have any other universal access, we need to stick to it. This is where we augment the rich editing feature of the standalone Microsoft Word document. Even when it is kept inside a sharepoint installation, it is impossible for anyone to know where the 'real' source of the page is kept. A confusion that is not even existing in a wiki as its page is equal to its location is equal to its content and is equal to its full revision.

The 'Dear Erica' letter

November 14th, 2009

We rely a lot on the RentaCoder and Odesk networks for your work. Both networks have their advantages:

  • RentaCoder has a solid arbitration system. Along with the ratings of sellers and buyers, you can see how many projects were put in arbitration and what was the outcome.
  • Odesk has a lot of tools as part of its service. One of them is the integration with CVS, the code repository system. Or rather 'was' CVS. Odesk has suddenly announced it will stop the service and within 6 weeks, all source code should be moved somewhere else.

Erica Benton, Odesk's Marketing Communication manager, has a hard time explaining this to the unhappy user base. Among the protests is a 'Dear Erica' letter, suggesting the company what a correct reply to its users could be. Maybe this letter will deserve a place in the history books, along with the so called 'Dear John' letter.

-------------------------

Dear Erica,

The best reply to this all would be:

--------

We're sorry we handled the svn phase-out poorly. Based on the feedback we received, we have learned that

  • our users find the basic service useful,
  • the transition time is too short,
  • we should have consulted our users what they think of the service.

So we have come up with following solution:

  • the current svn service will remain operational for another 6 months
  • during that time we will integrate our site with the one from CVSDude
  • as part of the odesk subscription, you can use the basic CVSDude subscription for free
  • users wishing to use a more advanced service, can upgrade to the professional service of CVSDude at a discounted rate of x %.
--------

I bet you'll get a lot of advantages

  • good press
  • happy users
  • phase out of your own support for cvs
  • CVSDude is happy because they'll get more revenue in the end

Everybody happy!

Just a thought

-------------

The link to the Linked In group where the letter first appeared is here.

An unforgiving tale of extremes

October 25th, 2009

My world friends

They are many, Salman, Nagesh, Pavan, Matjaz, Umair, Masood and not to forget Vicky (who I secretly suspect is really a man). All have top level rails qualifications. Or so they say.

They are all part of the growing network of developers from the East. India, Pakistan, Slovenia, and so on.

If you’re considering outsourcing part of your product development, I can offer you some insights that were learned the hard way. To summarize, working with outsourcing partners is a story of extremes:

Things move amazingly fast in the outsourcing-sphere. If you post a project request on Friday night, you can easily get 10-15 project proposals by Monday morning. The majority will be so called bid spamming. More about that in a later post. But invariably there are 3 or more that are worth considering.

You need a ‘detailed’ specification. And I mean detailed. I usually deliver the mysql db creation script, a functional specification, a detailed design, a set of screen captures.

So what happens next blows you off your socks if you are not prepared for it. Among the big number of replies, there are a few replies that really strike you as ‘professional’. They have read the proposal, react to the hidden question you sneak in, often ask intriguing design or specification questions. So you reply and they surprise you yet again with their answers.

They do this for price less than the cost of the office cleaning lady.

Yes, Mister Frans
Of Course, Mister Frans

So the next step is to get to get to know who is replying. I would advice not to go for companies at first. There are many smart businessmen that have hired young developers eager for a job. They know what you want to hear:

  • Yes Sir, we do complete quality control.
  • Of course Sir, we send daily status report.
  • Sir, this team is fully at your disposal. It is your team.
  • We don’t stop Sir, until you are fully satisfied.
  • If you have small change requests, don’t worry. We implement them for the same price.

Read this last line again. When was the last time you heard a Project Manager, American/European style, say that line. And you know what? It is true. My god, it is hard not to exploit that.

So go for the individual developer first. The guy that just left his company and now starts on his own. Often from his kitchen table. Strange coincidence, they invariably all worked at Microsoft. So test them. I mean, T.E.S.T. them.

Before I said you would need to check references (rentacoder.com keeps a nice history of user feedback). And not go below a score of 90% or even 95%. While that may help not to get bad ones, you would miss out on the real genius guys. For those ones, I cannot give you real rules. Trust your gut. Don’t feel pressured by time to select one early on in the process. I have kept some of my project requests open for weeks.

Now my limited sample clearly suggests that the bright individuals score the best scores. Two of the best experiences I had are with two individuals. On multiple occasions. As a consequence, I now give them jobs and get a result delivered in a few days, on one emergency situation, even in less than 12 hours.

The Girlfriend in China, or the motorcycle trip trough India.

Of course the individual has a life too. And he needs your money to pay for his plane ticket to China to meet his girlfriend. Or go motorcycling through India for two full months. And when they are not traveling, chances are high they are working on some other project, because other project owners have also found them.

Go for it. With caution

It is easy to lose your sense of professionalism. Because prices are so low, you tend to do a lousy job over specification. But trust me, my friend, when you are 3 time zones apart, clear, unambiguous specs matter even more. Some sites like rentacoder even encourage this. You can let two coders that bid for your project, do the job. Then pick the best one. I have yet to understand what that means and how (if at all) that would work.

My guess is: it does not work like that. You expect professional html, rails or dot net coding, the least you can do is be professional yourself. So spec to death, write acceptance scripts, and force yourself to have daily msn chats. Test, test and test. Give immediate feedback. Make them deliver the working system on your server and peek inside the code, the database and the logfiles. It is ok to be obsessive about it.

Good luck. You’ll need it.

Price is what you pay. Value is what you get

September 22nd, 2009

This quote comes from Warren Buffett. And with it, we want to introduce you to the fine art of "product pricing". As it was practiced by the full WordonWiki team.

In our pricing workshops, we had the full spectrum: from free forever, to ridiculously expensive. We now think we have come to something that is reasonable. Perhaps the more important discussion was: "who is our customer, and what do they expect from us".

To answer that question, we created a little story. Our customer is called Nick, the team lead for a dedicated team of 4 or 5 professionals. We couldn't really think of a sector, but one thing was sure: Nick was not in software. Nick's company is a Microsoft Office customer. All documents, spreadsheets and presentations were typical Microsoft Office files.

To aid in communication with the sales people, customer service and management, Nick found himself constantly sending out and updating office documents. With the familiar consequences. He spent countless weekends integrating revisions from different people. He had become the company's champion in the Microsoft Word side-by-side comparison. (If you don't know side-by-side, here is a nice 61minutes intro)

So Nick got himself and the team into 'wiki' software and after some evaluation decided they would go for a hosted solution. Of course, it didn't fly. While it started out good, the people outside Nick's team soon reverted back to mailing documents. Nick had been careful to select a wiki that would do WYSIWYG, but to no avail: people just couldn't get the tables and pictures in the way they wanted.

The happy end to the story is that Nick became a WordonWiki customer and lived happily ever after.

The morale of the story

So what does this typical customer want:

  • A quality product/service with a low entry barrier.
  • Growth path with price points that can be linked to a clearly increasing added value.
  • In case the business demands it, a possibility to migrate from a hosted solution to an in-house service.

At the same time, we as a company need to make money to pay for hosting, housing and excellent software people.

So after some Excel trickery, we ended up with this.

What we didn't cover yet...

We are sure there are a lot of non-profits out there that could benefit a lot from an easy-to-use Wiki software like ours. We have seen many companies offering special prices for those organizations. However, we must say we don't have any experience with this. There is also not a lot to find on how to set prices for non-profits. The best we could come up with is that we charge those organizations some sort of Cost+ subscription. Meaning we don't loose any money on it (we don't have deep pockets, yet), nor do we want to make big profits in those cases. The + in the Cost+ scheme is just to add some safety and to confuse the competition. Anyway,

  • if you are a non-profit, shoot us an email and I'm sure we can come to an agreement,
  • if you have links to articles that could give us more insight on the pricing topic, please comment on this article.

--- Roland

Usability sessions: the online attempt

April 20th, 2009

We experienced already a number of times that usability testing is absolutely essential to create good software applications. If you haven’t bought Steven Krug’s “Don’t make me think‘ book, stop reading this post and order it. It’ll be your best buy this decade.

Don't make me think

We are going through a redesign of our website and the screens. All we have is a static website, and a number of screen impressions (in PDF format). We have put up a question on a number of places. In this post, I’d like to share our experience about how that went.

“Linked in” is king

Of all places we have posted our invitation to validate our screens, LinkedIn.com was definitively the most successful. We got over 10 answers of people that really seem interested. “Yahoo Answers” was a distant second: only 1 answer on the 3rd day. All other places (blog posts, develop forums…) gave 0 results. Zippo, nada, nieltsj (I just invented that one).

Linked In

Free cookie

As part of our offer, we gave away free live time subscriptions. What did we notice?

  • Nobody bothered to ask us what and how this FREE thing was going to happen. To be honest, we don’t yet know ourselves.
  • When I asked those who participated if they really wanted the free subscription, they all confirmed.
  • We were in no position to do a split test on this one, but from the reactions we got, I think ‘FREE’ at least drew some extra attention.

50% success rate

Of all people that initially voiced their wish to participate, only half actually replied. I didn’t push people to participate.

Be specific about the format

One lady said she was disappointed by the format of the test. She expected a functional prototype, not some static PDF thing. I guess we should have made this clearer at the start.

Magical answers

I monitored my inbox for days to get the feedback. When results started pouring in, we were truly amazed:

  • the detail was phenomenal,
  • the analysis was thorough and
  • the similarities between all participants was striking.

Many people went over each screen in great detail, giving pro’s and con’s about various aspects of the design.

Conclusion

The online version of usability testing certainly misses out on some of the finer nuances of people’s reaction and initial confusion/enlightenment on your screens. However, when on the very early phases of design, I would compare this approach to the real live equivalent of ‘hallway testing‘. It gives you immediate feedback you just can’t ignore. So all participants certainly will get their FREE-Forever ticket.

Wiki switches to MSWord and Open Office

March 1st, 2009

This would probably make a ’scary’ headline for many. A recent post over at Simon Goh’s blog made an interesting comparison on how editing a wiki and authoring a document differs. Simon correctly argues that following MSWord features hinders a widespread wiki adoption:

  • Too much options to indicate changes:
    • Comments
    • Revisions
    • Strikethrough
    • Highlighting
    • Any combination of the above
  • No RSS
  • A ‘document’ has an owner, so other people are less inclined to modify it.

I would add following topics:

  • No easy ‘read’ feature
  • No easy ’show history’ feature
  • Cumbersome navigation between ‘wiki pages’, which could actually be ‘documents’.

Yet, wouldn’t we all want to combine the richer editing features with the community aspects of a Wiki. Of course, as we are building exactly this combination, we strongly believe in it.

Add comments on what stops MSWord users create the next Wikipedia.

Where Rentacoder fails

February 26th, 2009

We’ve been using rentacoder a lot for getting parts of our projects done. We don’t have all skills on the team, so we’d like to outsource were we can. For some strange reason, this does not seem to go well with the current WordonWiki software. We seem to be unable to find good programmers that have the necessary skills.

Is it a slowdown in the outsourcing market? Do we ask for a strange combination of skills? We don’t have a clue. If you are into outsourcing, and you have a good combination of skills in ruby, css, html, MS Word automation, send mail to jobs@wordonwiki.com.

I’m in love with MSWord

December 9th, 2008

This is not just a fling, but a long lasting relation.

It started years ago. It didn’t occur to me, until I was separated from it a few months ago. Because of company standards, I needed to do all my editing in this fancy wiki thing called ‘Instiki‘. I did try to make it work. I even put up with the weird * and _ syntax (textile). I got sick of it. Searched the net for alternatives and found one guy who had created a wysiwyg editor for instiki. Some mails and ruby hacking later, I got it working the wysiwig way…

It worked reasonably well. Well if you don’t intent to use images, or tables, or lists with more than one level. I found myself editing the html on more than one occasion (per hour that is)

One weekend, I had to write about 15 pages of specifications text. I gave up. I switched back.

This is where this idea to create a word based wiki started.