The Revolution Will Not Be Televised

We'll all be watching it on the internet instead - and the advertisers will be chasing online eyeballs. The UK is now the first economy where advertising spend on the internet has outstripped TV ad spend according to a report in the Guardian (online) newspaper.

Will this change the nature of the internet? Possibly - more obtrusive advertising possibly, the decline of amateurism as big bucks crowd out the mom n pop sites, a bonanza for SEO agencies as we all scrabble for Google page one, even more noise and less insight ...

The pace of the decline of 'traditional' TV will quicken as will the growth of the 'synergy' between TV and its online delivery mechanisms. In the UK the Murdoch war on the BBC will grow noisier. It might well be that the real target of Murdoch is the BBC's online presence, which has consistently set high online standards.

Murdoch's abandonment of Labour has more to do with Murdoch's strategy to eliminate competition than it has to do with politics per se, and as the Tories cosy up to Murdoch, they might just throw the old man the bones of the BBC's online output as quid pro quo.

What is certain is that we are witnessing the decline, or perhaps the downgrading, of a once omnipotent medium. For this reason alone, the revolution will not be televised, even if it is taking place within that medium.

Hello Vignette, Goodbye Red Dot

Sometimes one has to feel sorry for a customer base. They buy a product (a difficult and expensive process in the first place), stick with it despite its quirks and its sometimes boneheaded refusal to work, train their staff to use it, and develop systems around it, and integrate it into the core of their business processes. Then, the product gets retired, and the whole shebang starts all over again.

This is undoubtedly the roller coaster ride that some customers of Open Text must feel they've been enjoying/enduring* (* delete as appropriate) in the last couple of years. First Open Text buys the Red Dot Content Management System and retires their previous LiveLink WCM. Not to worry, existing customers are reassured about licence transfers and an easy migration path.

Then Open Text go and do it all over again! This time they buy Vignette and are now retiring Red Dot sometime after 2010. Instead, a hybrid 'Red Vignette' will be unleashed upon their customer base, again with reassurances about licence transfers and easy migrations. This is just as I warned in an earlier posting.

Any migration will be difficult and so will any hybridisation - Vignette is Java based while Red Dot is an ASP/.NET application. Open Text talk of using Vignette as the backend and Red Dot as the front end - great, you now need .Net & Java developers on board if you want to customise your implementation!

So, perhaps your company is forward looking and you decided to train some staff in .NET in order to prepare the way for the eventual migration from LiveLink WCM to Red Dot. Now, lets send them on a Java course as well so that we're prepped for when Red Vinegar comes around. Few companies have such training largesse in the current economic climate - thanks again Open Text.

Does it seem like somebody is taking the piss? You might say this is a valuable lesson that the licence cost is just the start of the expense of owning software. Still, you might think that its also time to start looking at Open Source solutions like Alfresco - which is both an EDRMS and a WCM. Afterall, what's the worst that Open Source could do to you?

Institutional Memory

Recently I was watching an episode of the West Wing, where they deal with the 'institutional memory' of the Bartlett administration and the Santos transition. There is indeed a White House Transition Project for this very purpose, since the US Federal government does not have a permanent civil service in the same was as the UK. New US administrations have always faced the problem of inheriting policies, problems and agendas from the previous incumbents without always knowing the full 'ins and outs' and reasons why certain decisions were made. The government can therefore be handicapped in its approach to these issues.

The importance of the 'institutional memory' was further highlighted to me the other day listening to Robert Peston interviewing the head of Barclays Bank, John Varley. Varley, in response to Peston's question as to why Barclays didn't suffer as much as its rivals in the recent financial meltdown, explicitly referenced the bank's 'institutional memory' of the near catastrophic over exposure to the property market in the early 1990s.

So how do you capture, nurture and learn from your company's 'institutional memory'? For small or family owned businesses, this may not be a problem, but for larger organisations, with higher staff turnover, this can be a problem. After all, when somebody leaves the company, they may take with them 30 years experience and knowledge with them, and the incumbent, especially if an outsider, may be hamstrung without this knowledge and experience.

One method to institutionalise that knowledge is via the exit interview. This has always struck me as too little, too late. Any manager will tell you that the personnel, the human capital, are the most important part of the company, but very little is done to capture and institutionalise their knowledge as part of an ongoing and rationalised process.

Another method is via documentation of decision meeting - minute books, and the like. As a one-time historian, I am very aware how quickly the informational context is lost. I've read many minute books, the context and meaning clear to all who attended but vague and often illusive to readers a generation later.

So, how do we capture the meaning, context and lessons of daily working practice, experience, knowledge and the rationale behind the decisions made? This is something I'll be turning my attention to later.

Offline Advertising is dead - right?

Once upon a time, not long ago, in an office not far from where I'm sitting now, it was once declared that offline advertising was dead! The internet, & Google in particular, had killed it off, it was said.

Well, I'm a skeptical skeptic. Today I received a magazine & out popped a flier from .... Google! That's right, Google is using a traditional marketing flier to advertise the benefits of advertising online with Google! Hmmm, seems the obituary for offline marketing was a little premature?

Simple lesson - if your prospective customers are not using the internet, then you have to use other means to attract them.

Magento How To - override Product Search

We are currently developing a heavily customised rollout of Magento for a client. As part of the modifications, we had to customise the product search within the Admin area. In Magento, this can be done using the 'override' functionality - meaning that core code is left untouched and upgrades shouldn't result in your modifications being overwritten.

To help others get a handle on the correct approach to take when doing this, we've published a guide on the Magento wiki - you can read it here. Please check it out and chip in with any corrections or improvements.

Vignette vs Red Dot = Open Source!

The content management sector has witnessed the start of a consolidation trend that will ultimately leave consumers wondering where their best options lie. Recently Autonomy purchased Interwoven, and now Open Text has purchased Vignette.

In both these cases there had been a fair degree of overlap between the companies. The result is that certain platforms and software are retired. When Open Text bought Red Dot, the casualty was Open Text's own web content management system (WCM or CMS) LiveLink WCM PS. Open Text has since announced the sunset status of LiveLink WCM PS and is offering existing customers licence offers and migration assistance to move to the Red Dot WCM platform.

Now the question is which CMS will Open Text champion - Red Dot or Vignette's rival WCM? Vignette is often considered the more 'enterprise' or 'higher end' offering, but the recent marketing effort undertaken by Open Text to persuade its user base to switch to Red Dot might suggest that Red Dot will win out.

However, if I was either an Open Text or Vignette user, this lack of clarity would be troubling me, especially if I was in the market to replace my existing WCM. My worry would be that I might back the wrong horse and find myself purchasing and implementing a 'legacy' application.

There are alternatives, of course, and open source will be seen by many as the increasingly stable option - less risk of the system being mothballed after a company takeover, the freedom to implement and customise as required, as well as the lower start up costs. Open Source means that you can do more with less, with a greater sense of security that your chosen platform will survive and mature.

Alfresco UK Meetup

Yesterday I attended the Alfresco UK meetup at Sun's UK HQ in Camberley. There were several presentations from customers & partners, as well as from John Newton, CTO & John Powell, CEO of Alfresco.

The elephant in the room was Oracle of course. Both Newton & Powell addressed themselves to concerns about the consequences for Open Source of the proposed Oracle acquisition of Sun. Overnight Oracle would become one of the biggest players in the Open Source arena, even if only indirectly through its ownership of Java & MySQL. Newton was upbeat about the future of both under Oracle, not least because MySQL is fully open source - if we don't like what Oracle are doing, we can use the code to create another 'MySQL'. That said, the fact that were we talking about it illustrates the degree of uncertainty that Oracle's move has caused in the Open Source world.

This uncertainty has consquences. In uncertain times, companies need reassurance when making technology choices. Oracle need to make their position crystal clear with regard to both Java & MySQL - we need actions as well as words. This is a pressing need, because the global recession is actually an opportunity for Open Source solutions to illustrate that they enable companies/Govt departments to do more with less.

The best and most interesting presentation illustrated the last point above. A representative from Islington Council gave an overview of their experience of using Alfresco as a document management and intranet platform. Alfresco was originally thrown into the mix at the requirements analysis stage to act as a 'sanity check' against the three EDRM solutions that were already in use at Islington. In the end only Alfesco met all the requirements - Islington adopted Open Source almost by chance.

Only after adopting and using Alfresco did the opportunities that Alfresco offers for shared publishing, collaborative team working, project dashboards, community forums, etc become apparent. It was then that Islington decided to use Alfresco for their new intranet. Since then their adoption of Alfresco has repaid handsomely.

So, in consequence, perhaps Oracle's proposed acquisition of Sun (& Java & MySQL) won't have any real downsides for Open Source, but we need this confirming asap, lest more Islington scenarios are missed due to uncertainty in the Open Source landscape.

New Dawn Fades as Sun goes down

Oracle, the database software vendor, has bought Sun Microsystems. Sun specialised in server hardware and software, but was also behind the Java programming language and various Java related tools and initiatives. Fairly recently Sun had also bought MySQL, the open source database.

So, what are the consequences for us of this acquisition? Well, most open source software uses MySQL as the primary database. Joomla!, Zen-Cart, Magento - to name just three - all use MySQL as the default database. You can add Drupal, and virtually every other open source project to this list.

The key question then is, will Oracle continue to support MySQL or will it allow it to wither as a direct competitor? Is MySQL actually considered to be a competitor by Oracle? The answer to this question will no doubt be a key influence on Oracle's eventual decision.

This decision has consequences for most of us, either directly or indirectly. If our business, website, etc, use open source software, then we may be faced in the future with having to change our database if MySQL goes down. The obvious open source candidate to replace MySQL is Postgress, considered superior by many. However, it is not clear how widespread is the hosting provision for Postgress - almost all hosting plans offer MySQL as a very affordable option, yet Postgress is still not offered by most hosting companies.

There is the real possibility that a fair proportion of open source software will have to be tweaked to use another database (Postgress) and that is again problematical if Postgress provision is limited.

Almost certainly Oracle's acquisition of Sun means we'll see, 'A change of scene, a change of style' with regards to the open source landscape. Whether we'll benefit from this is yet another question.

The Joy of Joomla!

My Leicester Web Design agency has been using the Joomla! CMS (content management system) for at least three years. In that time Joomla! has gone from strength to strength. And so have the 3rd party extensions available. With this platform we've been able to satisfy just about all of our customer's requirements.

One criticism levelled at Joomla!, however, is its inability to accommodate deeply nested content structures. Joomla! organises content along these lines - Home > Section > Category >Pages - just three levels deep. Content Management Systems like Drupal, LiveLink WCM, etc, can handle unlimited nested content levels. The next major release of Joomla! (1.6) will address this 'deficiency'.

However, this 'limitation' of Joomla! is actually one of its strengths! The Holy Grail of web navigation is that no content is more than three clicks away. Joomla!, either by accident or design, reinforces this best practice.

My own starting point is that if your content is more than three levels deep, then you're probably replicating organisational structures rather than putting your customer's requirements first. Therefore, Joomla!'s content 'limitation' is actually a perfect reason to reconsider your information architecture to make your content more accessible and more easily navigable.

So, whatever the size of your organisation and its website, Joomla! is a real candidate to help you manage the website.

How to procure a new CMS

In my previous post, I railed against the PQQ for upping the cost of software procurement and for favouring the larger suppliers/vendors. Well, how should a company or local govt buy their new CMS (content management system)? The following is based upon Kaushik's recommendations (p.104-7) in Web Analytics - an hour a day, & my own experience.

1. Appoint a project manager (PM) and make them responsible for the purchasing decision. This PM should also be the person who is primarily responsible for managing the company/council website. They must have the support of the CIO, Council Leader, etc.
   
2. The PM should appoint a small committee (2-3) of people who will use the CMS on a daily basis. One member should be technically competent if possible.
   
3. Write an outline technical requirements document.
4. Based on the expertise and experience of the committee members, select 3-4 systems that you believe will meet your outline requirements. At least one of these systems should be open source.
5. Set up test environments and install each system - spend several months getting to know each system, testing them, extending them, implementing a test solution (a special form or content type, etc).
6. When you have selected the tool that best fits the requirements, is easiest to use and has the potential to grow/keep pace with your organisation, then write a PQQ for a company to implement your chosen CMS. Don't write the PQQ in a way that favours the larger suppliers - a small/local company may provide a better, more tailored service.
   
7. Inform the business that you have chosen a tool and supplier for the new CMS.
   

At each point in the above process you might say you don't have the expertise in-house - to setup test environments, for example. Well, appoint a company that can do that for you - setting up a server to host a CMS should only take a day. If this is the situation, you should probably go for a hosted solution. If you don't have in-house expertise, buy it in. Money spent up front now will save even more money down stream later.

The benefits of the above approach are:

1. That you get to play with software before purchasing. Too often you only learn of the problems after you've spent loads of money & its then too late to change supplier or system.
2. By making a named individual (the PM) responsible for the purchasing decision, you encourage a sense of ownership and responsibility for the outcome. There is less room for back covering and a greater focus on delivering benefit for the business.
3. You limit the potential for scope creep. The inclusive approach only leads to occasional (or never) users asking for complex tweaks that dramatically increase costs for limited business benefit. You also prevent your project from being hijacked by another department working to another agenda - by keeping control your destiny remains in your own hands.
4. Finally, the process is quicker and cheaper and the outcome should be more certain.
   
5. You might also learn something about the qualities that your staff have or lack.
   

Do PQQs drive up the cost of software?

I recently had the frustrating task of completing a PQQ for a university looking for a replacement CMS (content management system). The PQQ was in two parts: The first was a mini technical specification, along the lines of 'can your system do x, y, z', etc. This in itself was quite a time consuming document to complete.

The second posed as a supplier competence test, and alongside the usual questions about financial probity and accounting history, were very detailed requests for costings and project timescales. For example, it asked for costings for staff training and associated budgets. Essentially, it was asking for what I considered a PID (project initiation document), which is something for a later stage, after a provider has been selected. This part of the PQQ was also very time consuming and the further I progressed, the more annoyed I became at the bureaucracy involved.

Why did this PQQ (& this is not an isolated example but a growing trend I fear) ask for so much information, information that arguably should not be requested at such an early stage? Well, the key reason I fear is fear itself - public sector workers are risk averse. The PQQ has become a back covering exercise conducted along the way to chosing the most expensive provider. After all, no one gets sacked for chosing the biggest, best and most expensive system. There is certainly no reward for saving money - budgets must be spent!

I have the benefit of having been on the other side of the PQQ process, whilst working as a consultant for a local government, so I know something about the mindset at work while drawing up these PQQs. They are written for the precise purpose to absolve the individual/department concerned from any blame for the outcome - afterall, the chosen product/supplier was the best on paper!

There is another, not unrelated dynamic at play too. After completing the PQQ I started to read Avinash Kaushik's, Web Analytics - an hour a day. Here he outlines (p.103) why PQQs (or requests for proposal) drive up the cost of (web analytics) software, largely because everybody has input into the requirements (scope creep), you then add requirements about vendor suitability, set an aggressive response deadline, and then have a committe of 'cross-functional representatives' to select a winner. As the long and expensive process ends, the

"guaranteed result is that you will almost always pick the most expansive, and usually one of the most expensive, (web analytics) solutions."

PQQs therefore are usually expensive and lead to expensive outcomes.

Thus, the PQQ becomes a vicious circle. The more extensive the PQQ becomes, the harder it is for SMEs to compete. So, these PQQs favour the larger companies, with sales teams dedicated to responding to PQQs, so SMEs are discouraged from participating because they don't have the expertise to respond to PQQs. So in turn, the procurement cost goes up - those sales teams need to be paid for.

While the PQQ may help guard against corruption and promote transparency, it also tends to engender complacency and acts to absolve those involved of having to make a real decision, one that is based upon their expertise and knowledge. Finally the PQQ also tends to lead to more expensive outcomes as it favours bigger players in the market place.

Onwards & upwards for Firefox

Firefox continues to steal market share from Internet Explorer - that's if our totally unscientific eyeball of our client's Google Analytics reports is anything to go by. Our own web design agency website shows 33% of visitors were Firefox users, with 52% using Internet Explorer (of one variant or another). Other sites report between 11-30% of visitors using Firefox.

This still leaves IE as the majority browser but indicates the importance of website testing against other browsers, especially Firefox.

Libel and the internet

A blogger recently failed at the High Court in his attempt to sue a commentator on his blog for defamation. The nub of the judge's ruling was that the fact that the blogger left the 'offending' comment on his site for a considerable time, mitigated against the claim that the comments caused 'substantial upset and distress'.

The implication here is clear. If you feel that comments on your website are defamatory, you should remove them asap (common sense really) - this is particularly important if someone else complains that comments on your website are defamatory to themselves.

So while social networking type sites, which allow users to add comments and their own content, are vulnerable to potentially libellous or defamatory material, the risk can be mitigated by careful policing of content and prompt action.

Thoughts on the Credit Crunch #2

Recently Gordon Brown announced his own version of the New Deal to revive the economy. Amongst the package of measures totaling £40bn were initiatives to speed up investment in renewables such as wind and wave power. One of the stated objectives is to help secure UK energy supplies.

This is welcome news. However, it may yet be too little, too late, not least with regard to the Russian-Ukraine gas dispute. While the UK gets very little of its gas from Russia, the disruption to European gas supplies has already led to UK gas stocks being diverted to hard pressed European buyers and delayed the possibility of UK gas bills coming down anytime soon. There is a suggestion that the European companies who bought up a large slice of the UK energy generation market, would favour European consumers over their British counterparts if the gas shortages in Europe continued.

Once again this illustrates the fragility of the UK's energy security. A small 'commercial' dispute in a far away country 'of which we know nothing', has shown the vulnerability of the UK to such events.

That said, the dispute between Russia and the Ukraine is too often described as a commercial dispute that has become politicised. This is to misunderstand the situation in Russia, where there is no neat distinction between the commercial and the political. It is barely credible that Gazprom, the Russian gas company at the heart of the dispute, could have turned off the taps without the express say-so of Putin. Indeed, this dispute has all the hallmarks of an ex-imperial power trying to bring an ex-colony to heel. The gas dispute is more the smokescreen for Russia flexing her muscles.

That said, it's a perfect illustration of the need for the UK Govt to seriously and quickly overhaul UK energy policy and embark upon a massive investment programme in renewable energy supplies.

How do users 'read' your website?

Recent research referenced by Jakob Neilsen, shows that web users read on average only 20% of the copy on an 'average' web page: "Scanning text is an extremely common behavior for higher-literacy users", Nielsen states.

This poses incredible challenges to web designers and content providers, as well as search engine optimisers. Why is this?

• Firstly, Google, et al, like copy - a common rule of thumb is about 200 words on a page.
  
• Secondly, you need an economy of style if you wish to convey the essential message in a way that 'scanners' can take in and assimilate.
  
• Thirdly, you need to organise your copy and page layout in a way that is visually appealing and 'signposts' the essential information.

So, there's a degree of tension between writing for Google and writing for your readers. Too much information and your users are likely to skip over the important information as they 'scan' the page. A common mistake made by content providers, especially in the public sector, is to publish verbatim reports and the like on their website - great 'Google food' but not particularly usable for the average 'scanner'.

Too little copy and Google will have difficulty in properly determining your page's relevance. This is a mistake often made by traditional graphic design agencies, whose approach is to use graphical assests to 'tell the story' - a picture speaks a thousand words, etc. However, too much use of imagery to convey meaning is lost on Google, and is not very accessible.

One methodology is to use heading tags (h1, h2, etc) to 'break down' the content, providing meaningful signposts for the 'scanners' and Google, followed by short paragraphs. Start the page with a keyword rich summary, so the 'scanners' don't need to read more to get the essence of the story. The BBC website is an excellent examplar for this form of best practice.

Another useful practice is to provide your content providers with a 'content template', so that each page follows a consistent pattern. This means that your site has a consistent information pattern that ensures that users have a consistent experience, so that 'scanners' get the information they require quickly and reliably. It also means that you have some degree of control over the quality and search engine performance of the copy written by your content providers.

In the meantime, take another look at your existing website - can you 'scan' it and still get the same message over that you want?

Secure the source code

I was recently called in by a company to extend a client's bespoke Java application. The problem was that the company did not have a copy of the source code - only its compiled version. Although I was able to decompile or reverse engineer most of the source code, there remained significant gaps (missing method returns, variable declaration and the like). Such gaps equal project risks and increased costs.

This is not the first time I've encountered this problem. In this instance, it was due to a complicated history of acquisitions, mergers and managerial buyouts. During such processes attention is understandably often focused on retaining the customers, intellectual property, etc, but careful consideration also needs to be given to securing assets like application source code, documentation and the like.

Often the lack of source code is down to the buyer's ignorance - they simply forget to ask for it. Their supplier has delivered a robust and working application, are on hand to support it, and everybody is happy. Why would they need something they don't know what to do with?

However, companies come and go, and you should always secure a copy of any code that is deployed on your servers, or on your behalf, if possible. Sometimes suppliers are reluctant to provide it, due to copyright and intellectual property issues. Appropriate licence restrictions and caveats should overcome these problems, however. This is a core issue with regards to business continuity planning and the like.

My web design and development company provides a copy of all the code we've developed once all outstanding invoices have been paid, should the client desire it. We are usually able to do this in part because we use Open Source Software whenever appropriate.

This is one area where Open Source Software (OSS) comes into its own. Distribution of the source code is not normally a problem - when you use OSS you usually get the source code, albeit with some restrictions regarding reselling it as your own, etc. In this way, your company's software investment is protected to a degree, since you can always get another supplier to fix/support your OSS application.

Whether your application is built using OSS or not, you should always attempt to secure a copy of any source code when a supplier has provided a bespoke application for you. In these uncertain times, this is of more relevance that ever.

Dangerous Celebrities

If you run your business from home and have teenage children using your PC, then your PC is particularly at risk. You've probably got an adult filter setup, but celebrity searchers are also being targeted by virus writers.

Top targets are currently Brad Pitt & Justin Timberlake for the men, and Beyonce and Heidi Montag for women (or vice versa). Cybercriminals attempt to persuade searchers to visit fake sites with the offer of free ring tones or wallpapers. These spammers and virus mongers also use social engineering techniques to persuade users to open emails which contain trojans and the like.

So, educating your users is essential in the online battle to protect your PC from being compromised.

Thoughts on the Credit Crunch #1

History repeats itself, first as tragedy, then as farce. Harpo Marx

We're all Marxist Brothers now, and we should look back to the late 1920s and 1930s as we navigate these uncertain times.

On Monday Alastair Darling made his pre-Budget announcement of measures to deal with the credit crunch. Key headliners was his cut in VAT from 17.5% to 15% and expansion of Govt debt to some £1/2 trillion to provide an economic stimulus. The Tories reverted to type, calling for tax cuts and, in effect, spending cuts as it warned against growing Govt debt. Osborne also called on the Govt to sort out the banking crisis by making the banks lend to consumers and businesses again - a bit rich coming from the party of city deregulation for the last three decades.

However, Osborne did have a point about the banks. The bankers are behaving like truculent teenagers. First they threaten mass suicide if they don't get what they want, and now they've locked themselves into their bedrooms and are refusing to come out and join in the family meal. The Guv'nor of the Bank of England, Mervin King, sounded like an exasperated parent when uttering his threat that the banks might be forced to start lending again. Yet King's quiet candour is a warning that the Govt's bailout is far from resolving the banking crisis. This is deeply troubling, especially since the British response has been the template for others facing similar problems elsewhere. If the bailout fails, then all bets are off.

Tax cuts, while welcome, do seem to be somewhat irrelevant for the following reasons. The credit crunch is a result of systemic failure, with loss of consumer confidence a by product rather than a cause of the crisis. Also, the fact that heavy in-store discounting of 20-30% has not boosted consumer spending does rather question the effect that a 2.5% reduction in VAT will have on high street spending. Furthermore, set alongside the collapse in the value of Sterling, which will mean that the price of imported goods will more than wipe out the VAT cut, this VAT cut will probably be of even more limited long term value. A nice news story in the run up to Christmas, but this recession is for longer than Xmas.

However, Darling was correct in pointing out that the Tories response - tax and spending cuts - was reminiscent of their policy during the 1980s recession. However, what he missed was that Thatcher used, and even prolonged, that recession for a social engineering and political restructuring project that aimed to permanently weaken the Labour movement and emasculate the Labour Party. This recession will be different because it is centred in those sectors - financial services, etc - that arose from the ashes of the early 1980s. While the slump of the 1930s and the recession of the 1980s were centred in the industrial heartlands of Old Labour, the chill winds of this recession will be felt throughout the land and will probably be more egalitarian in its promiscuity than its predecessors.

Labour should, however, be careful to look back into its own history as it confronts this crisis. It was the Labour Party's hidebound adherence to economic orthodoxy that sidelined it during the turbulent 1930s. The danger is that Labour repeats its mistakes by again resorting to orthodox measures in an unorthodox crisis. The first thing to recognise is that the credit crunch is on a par with the financial crisis of 1929, indeed it might surpass it in terms of its immediate impact and long term scope.

There are other disturbing parallels with the 1930s. Then all the bigger players were sidelined by events. America retreated further into an impoverished isolationism, British retrenchment reduced further its dwindling international standing, and German collapse and Italian adventurism destabilised Europe. The rise of authoritarian and expansionist regimes in Europe and the far east were one response to the world crisis. Today, the US is involved in two deeply unpopular foreign wars, and its own financial crisis will inevitably lead to a degree of foreign disengagement. Meanwhile, relations with Russia have steadily deteriorated whilst the resurgent Russian establishment looks to restore both pride and hegemony along its European borders. Events in Georgia have inevitably made Russia's neighbours wary, especially in the Baltic states where sizable Russian populations live. Russia is also throwing its energy fuelled weight around, looking to 'leverage' its energy resources in its foreign policy. There is little reason to doubt that Russia will not use America's distraction to its own advantage.

While none of this necessarily implies a repeat of the political and diplomatic tensions of the 1930s, we should be cautious of the possibility that an incident along the borders of the Balitc states quickly spirals out of control. A feasible scenario is that in such a situation Russia might attempt to use its gas resources as a blunt bargaining weapon with its EU neighbours. It's to forestall this possibility the the EU is now attempting to build a 'southern' gas pipeline beyond Russia's borders, but this project will not complete for some years yet.

In such a situation Britain would be incredibly vulnerable. The security of our energy supplies is more perilous now than it's ever been. Once self sufficient in energy, we are increasingly dependent on foreign supplies. We have around only two weeks gas supply in reserve for example. Even a particularly long or arduous cold snap would bring us to the brink of an energy crisis. If Russia choose to turn off the gas, we would not be well placed to respond and would quickly be confronted by power cuts, cold homes and public disquiet.

Here though is an opportunity for the Govt to address several issues at once - economic stimulus, energy security and global warming. It would require the Govt to undertake unorthodox measures and would run counter to their deregulatory tendencies.

The Govt should announce a war on fuel poverty and global warming and launch a publicly funded campaigns for fuel efficiency and energy renewables. The first thing it could do is engage unemployed quantity surveyors in a massive energy efficiency survey of Britain's entire housing stock. Every house found to be wanting in loft insulation, for example, would be insulated forthwith, regardless of income. This would be a mandatory scheme and would provide an immediate payback in terms of energy savings on an individual and national level.

The next aspect of the campaign would be a massive investment in wind and wave technology. The stimulus of Govt investment would kick start the renewables sector in the UK, providing us with an opportunity of gaining a technological and manufacturing lead in this vital sector. I would personally argue that national emergency should override the planning process and nimbyism, with wind farms popping up all over the place, on and offshore. The economic stimulus of such a package might be sufficient to keep Port Talbot operational for example, particularly if the Govt specifically favoured UK like-for-like suppliers (on ecological as well as economic grounds).

Finally, the Govt should embark upon plans to increase the UK's gas stocks, so that we have more security regarding our energy supplies.

Within 5 years we might be in a situation when the economic travails are over and we have something positive to show for it if the Govt adopted such a policy. While we won't have achieved economic self sufficiency, we will have helped those in need heat their homes more economically, reduced our reliance upon non-renewables and gained a technological and manufacturing lead in a vital new industry.

Bye, bye Woolies?

Woolworths' 800 UK shops are on sale for £1!

Once a bastion of the British high street, and the cool place for teenagers to hang out, Woolies is in discussions with Hilco to sell its UK stores for a nominal £1. Squeezed between tat merchants and internet retailers, Woolies lacked a branding strategy that could hook into its history and use it to appeal to a new generation of shoppers.

Open Source breakthrough

A new report by Gartner suggests that 85% of industries in the North America, Europe, and the Asia/Pacific region - including a cross section of small, midrange, and large enterprises - have adopted open source software (OSS). It also reports that the remaining 15% are considering adopting it.

Why the breakthrough for OSS? Well, the need to reduce spending is reported as a major cause, much the same reason why Linux made its breakthrough in the IT recession of 2000-1. OSS is currently being used in web, print, email and customer facing applications. It is also being considered for ERP, CRM type applications too. It seems a safe bet that OSS will be considered for future projects as a matter of course as the need to retrench on IT spending continues.

Our web design company has been using OSS for over 5 years now. Many of our client's websites are powered by the Joomla! CMS, their databases run on the OSS database MySQL. We've also deployed the OSS CRM SugarCRM, as well as a myriad number of smaller applications and code snippets.

We use OSS for much the same reasons as those surveyed by Gartner - cost, flexibility and quality. Perhaps its time for you to consider the same reasons for using OSS?