Recent Articles

I really didn’t expect it to be this hard.

Writers writing about writing always bothers me. With an almost limitless number of topics and ideas just waiting to be wrestled with through words combined into sentences separated by punctuation, the idea of writing about writing just seems so… shallow.

Several writers I have come across over the past few years have written about writing. They usually touch on topics like writer’s block, distraction-free writing environments, and how to get from nothing to something. As a non-writer, I always found these posts to be amusing but pointless.

And then, [Ben asked me to guest edit his blog][1].

I’ve kept [my own blog][2] for a number of years now. The vast majority of the posts I’ve written are what have come to be known as “link posts”—short, usually effortless articles which link to another article that may or may not be interesting to a particular blogger’s readership. I write these because I truly care about sharing cool things with people. But, it is also true that without them my blog could potentially go months without seeing any new content.

That’s because an empty screen scares the shit out of me.

When I started writing here at The Brooks Review, I thought I would be churning out great posts every day, filling up your feed with awesome links, articles, quotes, and more. I think I’ve done an ok job, but it was much tougher than I anticipated. My last post—[a look at a potential privacy issue with the Google Play store][3]—took nearly an hour to put together. Not because the topic was difficult to understand, or that I spent much time researching other sources, but because what I wanted to say wasn’t coming easily. The last line, “Yeah, but guys… ‘Open’” was rewritten four or five times before I was satisfied.

My point is, this shit is hard. I really have no idea how people like [John][4], [Jason][5], [Shawn][6], [Kyle][7], [Matt][8], and especially Ben do this seemingly every day.¹

So, the next time you see another writer writing about writing, give them the benefit of the doubt. Chances are, they’re just as scared of the empty screen as I am.

1. I’m embarrassed at how few female writers I read. I didn’t realize it until I put this list together. I initially tried to research female bloggers who write frequently, but then thought that wouldn’t be honest. So, honestly, I need to read more writing by women. Any suggestions? ↩

[1]: https://brooksreview.net/2013/02/mine/
[2]: http://patdryburgh.com
[3]: https://brooksreview.net/2013/02/i-cant-believe-ben-missed-this/
[4]: http://daringfireball.net
[5]: http://kottke.org
[6]: http://shawnblanc.net
[7]: http://tightwind.net
[8]: http://one37.net

Oh, baby! If only Ben were here…

[Claire Porter][1]:

EVERY time you purchase an app on Google Play, your name, address and email is passed on to the developer, it has been revealed today.

Good news.

The “flaw” – which appears to be by design – was discovered this morning by Sydney app developer, Dan Nolan who told news.com.au that he was uncomfortable being the custodian of this information and that there was no reason for any developer to have this information at their finger tips.

[Like Marco][2], developer Dan Nolan doesn’t want to be responsible for managing and protecting the personal information of his customers. He doesn’t need the information, and isn’t sketchy enough to even dream of doing anything malicious with it. But, I have a feeling that Nolan isn’t representative of every developer on the Google Play store.

According to Nolan, this is how the Google Play store has worked since the beginning. You buy an app, that app’s developer gets your deets.¹

Now, we all know [Google cares deeply about protecting your personal information][2]. And there’s no chance that they would let developers have your information without some sort of policy established for such a transaction…

Google’s terms of service state that it may store your personal information including your name, address and billing details, but nowhere in its privacy statement does the company explicitly state that it passes on your personal information to developers, every time you purchase their app.

The terms of service state that Google will share your address and personal information if you purchase a magazine subscription through Google Play, but it makes no mention of other apps.

Yeah, but guys… “Open.”

1. Ain’t no way Brooksie would say “deets.”² ↩
2. Not a big fan of “Brooksie,” either. ↩

[1]: http://www.news.com.au/technology/massive-google-security-flaw-puts-users-details-on-display-for-all-to-find/story-e6frfro0-1226577210852
[2]: http://www.marco.org/2012/01/06/autorenewable-subscription-restrictions

Since it’s [Ben][1]’s favourite thing in the world, and since he sent me an invitation for a free month trial, [I’ve decided to give App.net a try for the week][2]. There’s not much happening on my account as it stands, but maybe that will change by the end of the week.

While I’m definitely entrenched in the tech world, I am usually slow to adopt new products into my life. Most tech geeks love the pursuit of new products, always testing out the latest “Beta” of *XYZ*.app. I, on the other hand, much prefer to read about others’ experience before deciding to take the plunge.

App.net hasn’t intrigued me the same way that Twitter did when I first signed up in 2007. The product itself feels boring. Sure, it has many of the same features as Twitter, and a few extras too. But, what problem is it solving? I already have a “stream of short messages mixed with conversations” app, thanks.

I’ll give it a week and see how it goes. Maybe I’ll fall in love and never look back. Or, maybe I’ll just [delete it all and start again][3]. Again.

[1]: https://alpha.app.net/benbrooks
[2]: https://alpha.app.net/patdryburgh
[3]: http://www.70decibels.com/enough/2013/2/12/ep-189-the-rhone-internet-protocol.html

[Mat Honan][1]:

No app will save you from e-mail. You can’t swipe and sort your way to a better you, no matter how long the line is.

I’ve never understood why some people let email have such a strong effect on their mental and emotional well-being. I strive for Inbox Zero as much as the next guy, but the 12 emails sitting there now that I’ve yet to deal with aren’t causing me stress. Why? Because I don’t let them.

I host my email with Google Apps, and access it using Apple’s Mail applications for both OS X and iOS. I use Gmail to filter and process common emails such as receipts or newsletters, but otherwise my email lives in one of two places:

1. In my inbox, and
2. In an archive folder.

I don’t tag emails, flag emails, or colour code emails. I read them, I respond to them, and I archive them. Weeks later, when I need to reference an email, I search for it.

Maybe that system is too simple for you. Maybe it’s too complex. Whatever the case, pick a system and move on. Time wasted checking email could be time spent writing about email. And seriously, what could possibly be better than writing about email?

[1]: http://www.wired.com/gadgetlab/2013/02/mailbox-wont-fix-email/all/1

While Ben has a [beautiful daughter][1] to take photos of, play with at the park, and watch grow up and head off to prom, I don’t. So, I’m getting a dog to do those things.

Since I have another [37 lbs to go][2], I’m taking the time to do a little research into what type of dog I might be interested in. I’m even learning a few things along the way, like [the suggestion that humans may have a bit better of an understanding of the intent behind a dog’s bark than we thought][3]:

Researchers played a collection of barks to a group of people. Regardless of whether they owned a dog or not, most people could tell from a bark whether a dog was alone or being approached by a stranger, playing or being aggressive.

It’s crazy to think that for all these years, dogs have been communicating to us knowing we would understand, even if we didn’t suspect it.

[1]: https://brooksreview.net/2012/05/gx1-update/
[2]: http://hundreddown.net/show/3
[3]: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=what-are-dogs-saying-when-they-bark

While the [Postal Service][1] has been struggling of late, good news came earlier this year from [The Postal Service][2]: the musical duo would be [reuniting][5] for a special 10th Anniversary tour. Ben doesn’t post much about music here — I assume he’s shy about his Kenny G collection — but I was too excited not to share the [just-released, brand new song][3] from the [upcoming 10th Anniversary Re-Release of the band’s debut album, *Give Up*][4].

It’s been 10 years since the little project that could from Seattelite Ben Gibbard (aka Death Cab For Cutie’s frontman) and Angeleno Jimmy Tamborello (Dntel, Figurine) emerged from seemingly nowhere and began to burrow into the ears of anyone who came into contact with the band’s infectious electro-pop.

See, Ben? Seattle. Relevant.

[1]: http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/02/06/us-usa-postal-idUSBRE9150KX20130206
[2]: http://postalservicemusic.net
[3]: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=OIJaQhVoMZg
[4]: http://www.subpop.com/releases/the_postal_service/full_lengths/give_up_deluxe_10th_anniversary_edition
[5]: http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/1518974/the-postal-service-reunites

I wasn’t quite sure what Ben was thinking when he asked me to take over his site for a week. Surely he must know I’m not a [popular blogger][1] like himself. I don’t even carry a [pocket knife][2].

While I don’t get why Ben [handed the keys over to me][3], I’m glad he did. We’re going to have a lot of fun this week. Heck, maybe we’ll even [make this site responsive][4] while the owner’s away.

So get ready, kids. For the next 6 days, you are all mine.

[1]: https://brooksreview.net/2012/12/money/
[2]: https://brooksreview.net/2012/10/pocket-knife/
[3]: https://brooksreview.net/2013/02/tired-ben/
[4]: https://brooksreview.net/2011/10/rrw-design/

I’m not particularly stressed ((Although this door I have been staining for a week is really pissing me off.)), I’m not particularly overwhelmed. I’m not even mad, but for the past week I have just been feeling bored.

Bored of everything I see on App.net, RSS, and other blogs. There’s a lot going on, but nothing that I give a rat’s ass about. Oh well, I get this way every so often, but this time it’s different.

This time I feel a bit lost. Unmotivated even. I keep trying to find something to write about, something new, but I come up blank, or with things that I question the value of.

So I’m taking a break.

Not a long break, mind you, just a week to step back and rest my mind — I think my mind is just tired.

While I’m out, Mr. [Pat Dryburgh](http://patdryburgh.com) is going to be given the task of keeping you entertained.

Take it away Pat.

There is no shortage of content management systems (CMS) on the web: WordPress, MovableType, Kirby, Statamic, Drupal, Squarespace, Django, Expression Engine, and on and on. No shortage. Most of the current CMSs have begun to leverage Dropbox and respond to one of the loudest complaints about WordPress — its lack of caching — by making “static” or “baked” sites.

That’s all well and fine, but isn’t it time someone built a CMS that actually works for users? I like WordPress a lot, that’s what I use here, but it’s about as user friendly as Windows, which is certainly better than MS-DOS, but falls a long way short of OS X.

What *I* want is the iOS equivalent of a CMS: Massive power and expandability presented through a simplified, easy to understand interface.

Whenever I look at a CMS I usually see one of two use-cases: writing/blogging, or business websites. I find this absurd.

Any type of blog with an ad, or other monetization, is a business website. A business website with a blog, or any other written content, is a writing site. Both types of site need to sell goods — digital or otherwise — out of the box. Otherwise why bother?

So in my mind, the ideal CMS does all of this, out of the box:

– Pages
– Feedback forms
– Liveblogging
– Blogging (meaning a series of posts shown in chronological order, with an archive)
– Link posts
– Articles
– Comments & moderation
– Integration with a payment processor for credit cards
– Ability to sell ad spots within the site’s theme, see the number of slots sold, for which date, and for how much.
– Ability to create and sell memberships.
– Ability for a paywall.
– Allow the sale of digital goods, like software, and physical goods like books and t-shirts.
– Able to handle hundreds of thousands of hits per day, out of the box, on the cheapest hosting available.
– Require no knowledge of specialist software to install.
– Installable in less than 15 minutes.
– Be fully customizable: all the code.
– Be customizable in a WYSIWYG editor like Squarespace.
– Have a marketplace to buy themes and add-ons that have been vetted like Apple vets iOS apps.
– Cost users money to use.
– Include analytics out of the box that help users understand what is and isn’t actually working — this goes beyond numbers of visitors.

You may have noticed that I didn’t talk about the design or writing interfaces — those are not as important as how the system actually works. I can write in a text editor and copy and paste — I can’t easily setup half the stuff I listed above.

## The Thinking

This idea isn’t fully formed. This list wouldn’t make a feature-complete CMS, however, the rationale for such a CMS *is* clear: give people the ability to monetize their site out of the box.

Give me an easy way to sell things via my site: It doesn’t matter whether that’s content accessed behind a paywall, or a t-shirt.

Almost every existing CMS only focuses on one aspect of running a site. Use Shopify if you want to sell things, and WordPress if you want to write. Use Squarespace if you want the easiest and prettiest solution to blogging. We don’t have a CMS that makes writing your business, and to reiterate my previous point, most of business *is* writing.

Such a CMS may be massively complex under the hood, but it needs to be easy to use, like iOS. A user should be able to link a credit card processor to their bank account without leaving the site and add in the SSL certificate they need without leaving the admin panel.

This should, and can, be easy to do — so where is it?

By now you’ve [heard that Dell is going private](http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2013/02/05/dell-sets-23-8-billion-deal-to-go-private/), and is no longer a publicly traded company. [Michael Dell’s infamous quote](http://news.cnet.com/2100-1001-203937.html) has been slung all around the web as a [Nelson-esque](http://www.myinstants.com/instant/the-simpsons-nelsons-ha-ha/) “ha-ha” moment. Much of what I have read has been fairly wrong-headed, because most assume this is an admission of failure, but it’s not.

In fact, IPO-ing, or being public traded, is not a hallmark of success — it just so happens that in this tech-crazed world we often view a company *only* as successful when they actually IPO. There are thousands and thousands of companies that are [exceedingly successful and yet still private](http://www.forbes.com/lists/2011/21/private-companies-11_land.html). To name a few: Enterprise Rent-a-Car, SC Johnson & Son, Hilton Worldwide, and Levi Strauss & Co. I don’t think you could accurately point at any of those companies and say they are a failure because they are not public.

You take a company public if you need a huge cash influx to grow — that’s why Facebook went public, and likely why Dell went public. If you want to expand, and expanding in your business costs millions (or billions) which won’t be recouped for years, then an IPO is one of your only options. So Dell going private isn’t a sign of failure, it’s a sign of change.

[Ashlee Vance explains why Dell went private very well](http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-05/why-michael-dell-really-had-to-take-dell-private) (via [John Gruber](http://daringfireball.net/linked/2013/02/05/dell)):

>The worst-case scenario for Michael Dell would have occurred if an activist shareholder had gotten into the mix. Dell would have faced the prospect of being kicked out of the company that bears his name. I’m certain this is why Dell went private. Dell, Silver Lake, and Microsoft get a company that pumps out enough cash to keep all parties happy, while Michael Dell shields himself from being berated by analysts, investors, and the media. Best of all, he gets to keep his company.

I think this explains the situation pretty well. Dell was facing a group of investors that didn’t believe in the path he was steering the company too, and even though the company is still making money, the stock was dropping. We see this type of investor uncertainty with investors of Apple, Inc., because despite record sales, and profits, Apple stock drops in price.

[To that point, Watts Martin shares a sentiment that I very much echo](http://tracks.ranea.org/post/42369043060/good-for-dell-maybe):

>If I ran a company I’d try to avoid taking it public as long as possible. Public companies are expected to increase profits every quarter or face dire punishment, and eventually this all but requires cutting corners—and once you start doing that, it’s all but impossible to stop.

Now, taking a company private doesn’t mean you have no one to answer to, but it does mean that [idiot “analysts”](https://brooksreview.net/2013/01/anal-yst/) are not muddying the water. Effectively Dell can now take more risks and make bolder moves to try and reposition the company, or they can do nothing and bleed the company dry — both of which would not have been possible if the company is publicly traded. For further proof of this, look no further than HP and their revolving door of CEOs.

[Oh and speaking of HP, this is one hell of a cold statement from them on the situation](http://www.marketwatch.com/story/hp-issues-statement-on-dells-leveraged-buyout-plan-2013-02-05) (via [Jim Dalrymple](http://www.loopinsight.com/2013/02/05/hp-picks-at-dells-bones/)):

>Dell has a very tough road ahead. The company faces an extended period of uncertainty and transition that will not be good for its customers. And with a significant debt load, Dell’s ability to invest in new products and services will be extremely limited. Leveraged buyouts tend to leave existing customers and innovation at the curb. We believe Dell’s customers will now be eager to explore alternatives, and HP plans to take full advantage of that opportunity

All in all, this move is a smart one. It’s not an admission of failure, it’s actually a good sign. It shows that Dell knows he needs to do something that he would get fired for doing if he stayed a publicly traded company — that should encourage any PC user.

***

While we are at it, on the topic of Microsoft’s investment pissing off other PC Windows OEM vendors, I call bullshit. (Keep in mind I own like 14 shares of Microsoft, BIAS!)

What’s HP, Lenovo, Acer, and others to do if they are mad at Microsoft?

Use…Ubuntu?

There are only two commercially viable PC operating systems to sell to people: Mac and Windows. Ubuntu is great, but selling it in place of Windows is a ticket to losing billions. It’s been tried before on select systems, and guess what, commercial failure. As Linux geeks say (yearly), next year will be the year of Linux.

So ignore all the talk about backlash towards Microsoft for investing — if anything Microsoft can spin it by saying they are helping an OEM partner just like they would help any other OEM partner.