Friday, December 14, 2001

Manila and FrontPage There is a discussion going on about how FrontPage and Manila (or Radio) interoperate.  The simple answer is that FrontPage is a visual tool for designing webpage templates while  Manila is a browser-based system for managing a website (or weblog).   They do different but complimentary things.  Here is a more detailed answer: Manila is a full featured content management system.  It separates the content of your website from your site's template (the graphics, layout, and look-and-feel).  It stores all of your content and templates in a database, and automatically combines them into a webpage whenever anyone visits that page on your site (a kind of just-in-time publishing model).  This is an important to understand.  This means 1) if you want to create a new page all you need to do is click a button and the layout of the page is built-automatically.  All you need to do is add the content. 2) if you want to change a single item in the tempalate on a site with hundreds of pages, all you need to do is change the template in one place.  The content management system will take care of the rest.  3) if you want to edit the content of a single page, you don't have to call a designer (for fear of upsetting the design of the page).  All you would need to do is click the "edit this page" button on the page you want to edit and start typing in the editing window.  It's that simple. Now, how does FrontPage fit in?  Well, you need a way to create the templates you are going to use in Manila.  You have three options: 1) you can code the HTML by hand, 2) you could call a designer ($$), or 3) you could use a visual tool like FrontPage to design your templates.  Once you have the template design you want, all you need to do is cut and paste it into the appropriate template editing box on Manila (in the "prefs>advanced" section of the editors only menu).  It's that simple. The power of this combination becomes very important when weblogging.  Weblogs are time-organized.  That means that all of your most recent content is put at the top of the page, grouped by day, and then placed in the archive (the calendar on your weblog).  If you had to do that by hand, everytime you posted new content, it would be a nightmare.  3:15:25 PM    Comment_ Trackback []

>>>> Amy is right about how the airlines have destroyed their relationships with customers.  It was bad before Sep 11th, but it is worse now.  This has been a frequent rant of mine.  The airlines use regulations as a crutch. 1) They used the threat of terrorism to check IDs at the counter, but given their paltry implementation it was clear what they were really after:  people that trade deep discount tickets.  2) They also went after regulations to limit carry-on luggage after a clear air turbulance incident over Hawaii where luggage fell out of the overhead compartments.  Why the problem with carry-ons?  The airlines have increased seating density to the point where carry-ons need to be strictly limited.  So, rather than tell people that they have reduced services, they went for regulation. 3) Just after the no-smoking ban on domestic flight went into effect, the airlines started to reduce air quality by increasing the interval between purges of cabin air.  While this increases the efficiency of the engines, it makes the cabin air stale and increases the chances you will get sick. The current situation has allowed the airlines to all but eliminate meals on most flights as a security risk.  However, first class passengers are still getting the goods.  Make sense?  No. In general, the airlines have flubbed it.  They have reduced customer service to the point that flying is an aweful experience.  For business customers, this is intollerable.  Particularly given the fact that they often pay 5 times as much for the same seat as the vacationing traveller they compete with for arm rest space.  Yuck.  Sign me up for online collaboration. 11:54:24 AM    Comment_ Trackback []

>>>> Krugman.  Has the system gotten too smart for the Fed to be effective?  Yes.  30-year mortgage rates should be 5% at the current rate levels.  They aren't.  The entire financial world is predicting a boom next year, and as a result may prevent it from occuring. >Based on past experience, you would have expected the Fed's dramatic rate cuts since January to lower the Goldman Sachs index by about five points — enough to produce a roaring 2002. In fact, however, the index has fallen only about half a point, largely because long- term interest rates have not fallen at all. The Fed, in other words, is getting almost no bang for its bucks. Why? Part of the explanation is self- defeating optimism. Bond traders continue to believe, despite mounting evidence to the contrary, that Mr. Greenspan is a magician — that he will soon conjure up another dramatic boom, and will then raise interest rates to cool a red-hot economy. Ironically, this very belief helps keep long-term rates high, and thus ensures that no such boom seems imminent. < 8:45:16 AM    Comment_ Trackback []

>>>> The New Yorker.  The bin Laden economic effect.  When will it end? >The fact that the economy is facing two serious challenges simultaneously is what makes the outlook so uncertain. Wall Street is assuming that the vanquishing of the Taliban will restore the nation's equipoise and thereby spark a revival in spending by businesses and consumers. That is certainly a possibility—something similar happened after the Gulf War—but it is hardly guaranteed, especially given the President's insistence that Afghanistan is only the first battle in a lengthy war. <  I've always wanted to use equipoise in a sentence.  My view:  the economy can't recover to its previous growth rates until the technology sector is revived.  Unfortunately, it can't revive unless the companies it sells its products to fnd ways to use those products to radically increase productivity.   Right now, most technology investments are not providing productivity growth in most sectors.  Why?  The technology spends most of its time in mental masturbation:  1) Focused on boy vs. boy competitive issues that sink interoperability. 2) Spending time building technology that automates bad practices (ie.  building a system that automates document replication vs. building a system that eliminates the need for document replication). 3) Focused on visions of the future that are neither realistic or useful (3G phones spring to mind) due to their specific end-states.    8:10:27 AM    Comment_ Trackback []