Ágrip af sögu af SharePoint (Frá sjónarhóli nýlunda í hagsögu á)

Athugaðu: Þessi grein var upphaflega settar til www.endusersharepoint.com. I forgot to post it to my own blog 🙂

SharePoint hefur þróast mikið frá því árdaga þess sem einhverskonar á meðgöngutíma tækni við Microsoft –það er þróast næstum eins og hryllingi myndinni, þar sköpun vitlaus vísindamaður tekur á líf sitt, breaking free of its creator’s expectations and rules. The technical evolution is obvious – the WSS 3.0 mótmæla líkan er ríkari og flóknari en WSS 2.0, which was itself an improvement over earlier versions. The next version will no doubt show tremendous improvement over 3.0. From an End User’s perspective, þó, Þróun SharePoint er jafnvel meiri.

Í árdaga, SharePoint didn’t offer much to End Users. They would have their usual functionality requirements, work with IT to define them well and implement a solution. IT would use SharePoint to solve the problem. The product wasn’t very accessible to End Users. I’ve thought threw a few analogies, but I decided to stick Venn Diagrams to show what I mean. When Microsoft first released SharePoint to the world as a commercial offering, það fylgdi tiltölulega hefðbundna mynstur endir notandi <-> IT relationship. A lot of End Users, samskipti og vinna með mjög litlum fjölda IT fólk til að skila lausnum sem leysa fyrirtæki vandamál:

Í heild Vandamálið ríki sem SharePoint er hentugur sending pallur er lítill (especially compared to today’s SharePoint. End Users and IT worked in a more classic arrangement with IT: skilgreina kröfur til ÞAÐ, bíða eftir því að gera vinnu sína á bak við fortjaldið og taka við af endanlegri vöru.

Eins SharePoint þróast til 2.0 heim (WSS 2.0 og SharePoint Portal Server), several things happened. Fyrsta, the “problem domain” increased in size. By problem domain, I mean the kinds of business problems for which SharePoint could be a viable solution. Til dæmis, þú vildi ekki hugsa of erfitt um framkvæmd Alvarlegar Leita lausn í SharePoint umhverfi þar SPS (og jafnvel þá, það var ekki eins góð og hún þarf að vera). Á sama tíma, End Notendur hafa ótal möguleika til að ekki aðeins að skilgreina, but also implement their own solutions with little or no IT support.

The 3.0 pallur (WSS og MOSS) maintained and increased that momentum. The problem domain is enormous as compared to the 2.0 pallur. Virtually every department in a company, allt frá heilsu framleiðslu og öryggi deildir til markaðssetningar, af sölu til gæðaeftirlit - þeir geta fundið góða notkun fyrir SharePoint (og það er ekki að ræða kornstappa hring Peg í fermetra holu). Á sama tíma, the platform empowers even more End Users to implement their own business solutions. I try to capture that with this diagram:

This has proven to be both a potent and frustrating mixture. The 3.0 platform turns previously stable roles on their heads. Suddenly, Notendur eru í raun dómari, Dómnefnd og varðmann Viðskipti Analyst, application architect and developer for their own business solutions. This gets to the heart of the problem I’m writing about. But before I dive into that, skulum íhuga fíl í herberginu.

Peering í Crystal Ball

Hvernig mun SharePoint 2010 áhrif þetta mynstur? Will it be incremental or revolutionary? Will more, færri eða um sama fjölda notenda End finna sig umboð til að byggja lausnir í SharePoint 2010? Will SharePoint 2010’s problem domain expand even further or will it just refine and streamline what it already offers in WSS 3.0 / Moss?

Það er nóg um "þarna úti" að óhætt að segja að almenn svarið er:

• The problem domain is going to dramatically expand.
• Notendur munu finna sig enn meira vald en áður.

The Venn Diagram would be larger than this page and cause some IT Pros and CxO’s to reach for their Pepto.

I believe it’s going to be a tremendous opportunity for companies to do some truly transformational things.

Engar Bulls í Kína Shop My!

Þetta hljómar frábærlega, en frá sjónarhóli mínu að skoða sem SharePoint ráðgjafi og setja mig í spor ÞAÐ framkvæmdastjóri, I see this vision. I own a China shop with beautiful plates, kristal, o.fl. (SharePoint umhverfi mitt). I’ve rented a space, I’ve purchased my inventory and laid it all out the way I like it. I’m not quite ready to open, en í aðdraganda, I look at the door to see if my customers are lining up and I notice an actual bull out there. I look more closely and I actually see tveir bulls and even a wolf. Then I notice that there are some sheep. Sheep are svo slæmt, en eru þeir dulbúnir kannski úlfa? I don’t want bulls in my china shop!

Það versnar! When I rented the space, I couldn’t believe how nice it was. Wide and open, frábær þjónusta, very reasonable price. Hins, nú er ég að átta sig á að breiður opin rými og mikil dyr er bara fullkomlega stór fyrir nauti að koma ráfandi inn og leggja úrgang til Kína minn.

Ég er að þrýsta þetta hliðstæðan of langt, auðvitað. End Users are not bulls (flestir, samt) og IT deildum ekki (eða örugglega ætti ekki) view their user community with that kind of suspicion. Hins, Það er einmitt svona fullkomna árekstur á sér stað þegar í því 3.0 platform that I expect will only get worse in SP 2010. SharePoint already empowers and encourages End Users to define and implement their own solutions.

Það er frábært og allt, en staðreyndin er að það er enn mjög tæknilega vöru og enn kallar konar öflugum viðskipti kröfur greiningu, design and general planning and management that technical projects require to be successful. These are not the kind of skills that a lot of End Users have in their bag of tricks, especially when the focus is on a technical product like SharePoint.

I’ve given this a lot of thought over the last year or so and I don’t see any easy answer. It really boils down to education and training. I think that SP 2010 er að fara að breyta leiknum aðeins og það er að fara að spila út öðruvísi og í hægur hreyfing sem fyrirtæki rúlla út SP þeirra 2010 lausnir yfir 2010 and beyond. In order to succeed, End Users will need to transform themselves and get a little IT religion. They’ll need to learn a little bit about proper requirements
analysis. They will need some design documentation that clearly identifies business process workflow, til dæmis. They need to understand fundamental concepts like CRUD (búa, uppfæra og eyða), dev / próf / QA / vörur umhverfi og hvernig á að nota þessi innviði til almennilega dreifa lausnir sem búa a ágætur langan tíma og beygja (ekki brjóta) til að bregðast við breytingum í skipulagi.

Á næstu vikum, Ég ætla að reyna að gefa sumir af eigin nýrra mínum hugmyndum, auk tengill á mikla vinnu af mörgum öðrum höfunda (á www.endusersharepoint.com og annars staðar) so that interested End Users can learn that old time IT religion. Keep tuned.

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

Fylgdu mér á Twitter á http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

[Athugaðu: This article cross-posted to End User SharePoint hér: http://www.endusersharepoint.com/2009/09/09/sharepoint-a-case-study-in-ask-the-expert/]

Stundum, þegar þú ert að vinna sem ráðgjafi (sem starfsgrein, eða í ráðgjafarstörf innan fyrirtækisins), you find yourself living in an Onion story. The Onion has a series of articles called “Ask an [sérfræðingur] um [einhver vandamál]". This follows the famous “Dear Abby” format where a concerned person is asking for personal advice. The onion’s “expert”, þó, is so focused on his/her area of expertise and current problems that the expert ignores the question entirely and rambles on about his area of expertise. As consultants, we need to keep that in mind all the time and avoid falling into that trap. It’s classically described like this – “when you use a hammer all day long to solve your problems, everything starts to look like a nail.” We professional consultants are always on guard against that kind of thing, en við komum í snertingu við fólk sem er alvarleg sérfræðingar í eigin hlutverk þeirra, but are not consultants. They don’t have the same need or training to do otherwise.

Í síðustu viku, Ég skrifaði um einn af viðskiptavinum fyrirtækisins míns og viðvarandi verkefni we have to enable high quality collaboration between various eye doctors in the US and Canada performing clinical research on rare disease. In addition to leveraging core SharePoint features to enable that collaboration, we’re also working an expense submission and approval process. It’s complicated because we have so many actors:

• A handfylli af einstaklingum á æfingar mismunandi lækna sem geta slá útgjöld á línu.
  • Það eru yfir 40 venjur lækna '.
  • Á sumum venjur, the doctor uses the system directly.
  • At many practices, the doctor’s staff uses the system directly.
• A financial administrator (who works for my direct client) who reviews the expenses for accuracy and relevancy, approving or denying them at the organizational level.
• A 3rd party accounts payable group. These people pay all of the bills for out client, not just bills coming out of the rare disease study.

The Accounts Payable group has been a challenge. Working with them yesterday reminded me of the Onion series. In my role as business consultant, I explained the need to the accounts payable company:

• Clinical studies sites (venjur lækna ') incur study-related expenses.
• They log onto the “web site” and enter their expenses using an online form. Í þessu tilviki, the “web site” is hosted with SharePoint and the expenses are entered into an InfoPath form. Expense receipts are scanned, hlaðið og tengdar beint saman í formi.
• Sjálfvirk workflow ferli leitar samþykki frá viðeigandi fjárhagslega stjórnandi.
• Þú, dear 3rd party AP company – please review and approve or deny this expense. I’ll send it to you any way that you want (innan þess).Á þessum tímapunkti í umræðunni, I don’t really care how it needs to be bundled. I want to work with the AP group to understand what they need and want.

Þegar ég útskýrði þörfina, 3. flokkurinn tók djúpt kafa í innri muldra þeirra Jumbo lingo um kostnað samþykki ferli, Véfrétt kóðar, varaformaður forsetakosningarnar undirskriftir, 90 dag snúa-arounds, o.fl.. And panic. I shouldn’t forget about the panic. One of the bed rock requirements of the consulting profession is to learn how to communicate with people like that who are themselves not trained or necessarily feel a need to do the same. Among other things, it’s one of the best parts of being a consultant. You get to enter a world populated with business people with completely different perspectives. I imagine it’s a little bit like entering the mind of a serial killer, except that you aren’t ruined for life after the experience (though entering the mind of an AP manager isn’t a walk in the park 🙂 [see important note below***] ).

One of the great things about our technical world as SharePoint people is that we have ready-made answers to many of the very valid concerns that people such as my AP contact have. Is it secure? How do I know that the expense was properly vetted? Can I, sem endanlega greiðanda, sjá allar upplýsingar um kostnað? How do I do that? What if I look at those details and don’t approve of them? Can I reject them? What happens if the organization changes and the original approver is no longer around? Can we easily change the process to reflect changes in the system? Get ég rifja þetta gjald á ári seinna ef og þegar ég fæ endurskoðaður og þurfa að verja greiðslu?

Eins SharePoint fólk, we can see how to answer those questions. In my client’s case, we answer them more or less like this:

• InfoPath form to allow sites to record their expenses and submit them for approval.
• Sites can return to the site to view the status of their expense report at any time.
• As significant events occur (e.g. the expense is approved and submitted for payment), the system proactively notifies them by email.
• The system notifies the financial administrator once a report has been submitted for approval.
• Financial administrator approves or denies the request.
• Upon approval, the expense is bundled up into an email and sent to the 3rd party payer organization.
• The 3rd party payer has all the information they need to review the expense and can access the SharePoint environment to dig into the details (primarily audit history to verify the “truth” of the expenses).
• 3rd party payer can approve or reject the payment using their own internal process. They record that outcome back in the SharePoint site (which triggers an email notification to appropriate people).
• In future, it would be nice to cut out this stilly email process and instead feed the expense information directly into their system.

In conclusion, there’s a life style here that I describe from the professional consultant’s point of view, but which applies almost equally to full time employees in a BA and/or power user role. Work patiently with the experts in your company and extract the core business requirements as best you can. With a deep understanding of SharePoint features and functions to draw upon, more often than not, you’ll be able to answer concerns and offer ways to improve everyone’s work day leveraging core SharePoint features.

***Mikilvæg athugasemd: I really don’t mean to compare AP people to serial killers. Hins, I could probably name some AP pro’s who have probably wished they could get a restraining order against me stalking them and asking over and over again. “Where’s my check?” “Where’s my check?” “Where’s my check?"

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

Fylgdu mér á Twitter á http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

[Athugaðu: þetta blogg er yfir settar á síðuna Mark Miller hér: HTTP://www.endusersharepoint.com/?p = 1.897]

Einn af félagsins mín meira óvenjulegt viðskiptavinum er New York City læknir, sem er leiðandi á tilteknu sviði hans læknisfræði (auga aðgát). Like many doctors, he has a strong interest in research. He wanted to do some research on a rare eye disorder that affects a relatively small number of people in the U.S. and Canada. I don’t know the number, but it’s really too small for a large pharmaceutical company to invest its own private funds with an eye toward eventual commercial success. I’m sure large pharma’s do some amount of research into rare diseases, en ég tel að bandarískt. government is probably the largest source of funding. Eins og ekkert, resources are scarce. Many doctors across the country want to perform research and trials. Þar af leiðandi, there’s more than a little competition for that government funding. This is where my company and SharePoint enter the picture.

The fundamental idea is that a master organization will recruit other doctors across the country and enlist those doctors’ practices in a particular research study. These individual practices must sign up with the master organization and then, síðan, sign up for a particular study. The relationships look like this:

• Einn herra stofnun.
• Venjur mörgum mismunandi læknir skrá sig með skipstjóra skipulag.
• The master organization obtains funding for individual studies. At the outset, það er bara ein rannsókn á tilteknum sjaldgæf auga sjúkdómur en við erum nú þegar rampur upp fyrir annarri rannsókn.
• Individual doctors’ practices sign up for specific studies. A specific practice could sign up for one or multiple studies.

Skipstjóri sjálft er skipt niður í hópa:

• Framkvæmdanefnd
• Stýrihópur
• Einstök nefndir rannsókn
• Gjöf
• aðrir

Lokum, þegar æfa ákveðna læknis skráir sig til að taka þátt í rannsókn, þeir þurfa að veita sérfræðinga til að uppfylla ýmis hlutverk:

• Rannsóknarmenn (þ.mt aðal rannsóknaraðili, venjulega læknir, ásamt einum eða fleiri investigators)
• Landanna
• Tæknimenn
• Styrkir stjórnendur
• aðrir

The above roles have very specific and highly proscribed roles that vary by study. I won’t get into more detail here, en ef þú hefur áhuga, eftir umsögn eða email mig.

Og nú get ég svarað spurningunni, SharePoint - Hvað er það gott fyrir? The answer – it’s really good for this scenario.

Þetta Intro er þegar lengri en ég bjóst við, svo ég ætla að draga saman hið mikilvæga hlutverk sem SharePoint spilar í lausninni og kafa inn upplýsingar í framtíðinni grein (ef þú getur ekki beðið, email mig eða leyfi a athugasemd og ég mun vera fús til að ræða og kannski jafnvel reyna að gera kynningu). We are leveraging a wide array of SharePoint features to support this concept:

• Síður fyrir nefndum, einstökum hlutverkum (samræmingarstjóra staður, rannsakanda staður, o.fl.).
• Öryggi til að tryggja að mismunandi venjur sérð ekki gögn annarra vinnuaðferða ".
• InfoPath forms services for online form entry. This is a particularly big win. Normally, þessum erfiðu eyðublöð eru prentuð, send til venjur, filled out and mailed back. The advantages to the online forms are obvious. They do introduce some complexities (leyfisveitingar og manna) en það er önnur saga.
• Út af the vefur kassi hluta, eins tilkynningum (þegar er nefnd [x] mæta?) og fundi vinnu rými.
• Eyðublöð undirstaða staðfesting ásamt Codeplex tól til að veita sjálf-skráningu og lykilorð gleyma lögun.
• Sérsniðin listum og listar fyrir skyggni í starfsemi rannsóknar sem einfaldlega eru ekki mögulegt með hreinu pappír og blýantur líður.

Að undanskildum eyðublöðum undirstaða staðfesting mát og handfylli af myndum Infopath, þetta verkefni er að nota næstum öll út af SharePoint kassi virkni.

Áður en ég sett upp þessa mín-dæmisögu, Ég vil benda á eitthvað mjög mikilvægt - ekki á þátt í þessu verkefni (innskot frá fyrirtæki mínu auðvitað) has any idea that a thing called “SharePoint” is playing such a fundamental technical role. Nearly all of my end users view this as “the web site.” Our client values us because we’re solving their business problem. SharePoint is a great technical blob of goodness, en gert á réttan, that’s irrelevant to end users. They need a problem solved, ekki yndislegt Blob tækni.

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

Fylgdu mér á Twitter á http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Eða er það bara ég? I’ve received three or four calls at my house since late September looking for SharePoint work. I’m used to the email solicitations, but these phone calls are a little unnerving. I haven’t had an updated resume on a job site I(like Monster pr Dice) since almost two years ago exactly. And back then, my resume was all about BizTalk and MS CRM. That’s the only place my phone number appears on line anywhere, svo langt sem ég veit.

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

Fylgdu mér á Twitter á http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Lokun hélt á þetta annars daufa grein talar vel á vandamálum sem við stöndum frammi oft í tæknilegu samfélagi:

"Such dreary developments, ráð með vissu, verður að hafa heimspekilega."

This puts me in mind of one of the presentations I gave at the SharePoint Best Practices conference last month. I was describing how to get "great" viðskipti kröfur og einhver í áhorfendur spurt, í raun, what to do if circumstances are such that it’s impossible to get great requirements. Til dæmis, menningu viðkomandi fyrirtækis setur það fyrir framan kröfur safnarar / Viðskipti Analyst, preventing direct communication with end users. This is a serious impediment to obtaining great business requirements. My answer was "walk away." I’m not a big humorist, so I was surprised at how funny this was to the audience. Hins, I’m serious about this. If you can’t get good requirements, you can be certain that a dreary outcome will result. Who wants that? I’m a consultant, svo það er meira raunsætt (þó hræðilega sársaukafullt og róttækar) for me to walk away. Hins, ef þú ert entrenched í fyrirtæki og vilt ekki að, eða getur ekki, ganga í burtu, George (for once 🙂 ) sýnir hvernig.

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

Fylgdu mér á Twitter á http://www.twitter.com/pagalvin

Hversu oft hefur þetta gerst við þig? I’m sitting at my laptop, lesa bloggin, bregðast við umræðum bréf, 2 eintök af Visual Studio opna og VPN'd út á annan miðlara með eigin sjón-stúdíó sínu + 15 vafraglugga (dæmigerður dagur) og einhver nefndi Samantha (konan mín, virðist) segir mér, "We have be there in 30 mínútur. Get dressed."

Ég fæ upp í daze, reika í kring the hús confusedly, fá í bíl og næsta sem ég veit, Ég er í partýi með bjór í hendinni og einhver biður mig, "So, hvað gerir þú fyrir lifandi?"

Þessi samtöl fara aldrei vel.

Mig: "Ahh … Ég er lausnir arkitekt fyrir EMC."

Nafnlaus manneskja: auður uppgufunareiningunni

Mig: "I work with a product called SharePoint … það er frá Microsoft."

NP: "Aha! Ég hef heyrt þess félags! What is SharePoint?"

Mig: "Umm … það gerir samstarf … fólk notar það til að deila upplýsingum … Það er vettvangur til að byggja busines sol…"

NP: Eyes glerjun.

Mig: "I’m a programmer."

NP: "Aha! I know people in my company that do programming! When I was in high school, Ég spilaði í kring með BASIC."

Og með þeim hluta samtalsins á, við snúum okkur að eitthvað auðveldara að tala um, eins stjórnmálum.

Einhver umönnun að lýsa hvernig þeir höndla þetta?

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

Ég hef verið í bekkjum þessar síðustu tvær vikur og einn hlutur sem slær mig er að það er mikið af hugsi, sviði fólk að vinna á SharePoint (sem ráðgjafa eða ÞAÐ starfsfólk) sem ekki blogga ekki, Twitter, virðast meðvitaðir um almenn skilaboð eins og MSDN vettvang eða SharePoint University, viðhalda Facebook eða LinkedIn snið, o.fl.. They are pure information consumers. Not bad, bara áhugavert.

</enda>

Gerast áskrifandi að bloggið mitt.

A fullt af árum, my boss asked me to train some users on a product called Results. Results is an end user reporting tool. It’s roughly analogous to SQL Server Reporting Service or Crystal. At the time, það var hannað til að keyra á græna rör (e.g. Wyse 50 flugstöðinni) connected to a Unix box via telnet.

My default answer to any question that starts with "Can you … " is "Yes" og það er þar sem allar vandræði byrjaði.

Viðskiptavinurinn var efna fyrirtæki í Suður-Kaliforníu og hafði bara um umbúðir upp stórt ERP framkvæmd á grundvelli Er QAD MFG/PRO. The implementation plan now called for training power end users on the Results product.

I wasn’t a big user of this tool and had certainly never trained anyone before. Hins, Ég hafði fram fjölda annarra flokka þjálfun og var fljótur á fætur, so I was not too worried. Dennis, alvöru fullur-tími niðurstöður kennari, had given me his training material. Looking back on it now, it’s really quite absurd. I didn’t know the product well, had never been formally trained on it and had certainly never taught it. What business did I have training anyone on it?

Til að flækja hlutina logistically, I was asked to go and meet someone in Chicago as part of a pre-sales engagement along the way. The plan was to fly out of New Jersey, fara til Chicago, meet for an hour with prospect and then continue on to California.

Jæja, I got to Chicago and the sales guy on my team had made some mistake and never confirmed the meeting. Svo, I showed up and the prospect wasn’t there. Awesome. I pack up and leave and continue on to CA. Somewhere during this process, Ég komast að því að viðskiptavinurinn er að læra minna en 24 hours before my arrival that "Paul Galvin" er að kenna bekknum, not Dennis. The client loves Dennis. They want to know "who is this Paul Galvin person?" "Why should we trust him?" "Why should we pay for him?" Dennis obviously didn’t subscribe to my "gefa slæmar fréttir snemma" philosophy. Awesome.

Ég kem á flugvellinum og fyrir sumir ótrúlega heimskur ástæða, I had checked my luggage. I made it to LAX but my luggage did not. Fyrir mig, tapa farangur er mikið eins og að fara í gegnum sjö stigum sorg. Eventually I make it to the hotel, án farangri, þreyttur, svangur og þreytandi minn (nú, mjög krumpuðum) business suit. It takes a long time to travel from Newark — to O’Hare — til viðskiptavinar — aftur til O'Hare — og að lokum til LAX.

Mér finnst loksins sjálfur situr á hótelherbergi, munching á Snickers bar, exhausted and trying to drum up the energy to scan through the training material again so that I won’t look like a complete ass in front of the class. This was a bit of a low point for me at the time.

Ég vaknaði næsta dag, did my best to smooth out my suit so that I didn’t look like Willy Loman on a bad day and headed on over to the client. As is so often the case, í eigin persónu hún var nice, polite and very pleasant. This stood in stark contrast to her extremely angry emails/voicemails from the previous day. She leads me about 3 miles through building after building to a sectioned off area in a giant chemical warehouse where we will conduct the class for the next three days. The 15 eða 20 nemendur saman rólega, most them still expecting Dennis.

Ég byrja alltaf á þjálfun bekkinn með því að kynna mig, giving some background and writing my contact information on the white board. As I’m saying, "Good morning, my name is Paul Galvin", Ég skrifa nafn mitt, email and phone number up on the white board in big letters so that everyone can see it clearly. I address the fact that I’m replacing Dennis and I assure them that I am a suitable replacement, o.fl.. I have everyone briefly tell me their name and what they want to achieve out of the class so that I can tailor things to their specific requirements as I go along. The usual stuff.

We wrap that up and fire up the projector. I go to erase my contact info and … I had written it in permanent marker. I was so embarrassed. In my mind’s eye, það leit svona út: There is this "Paul Galvin" manneskja, last minute replacement for our beloved Dennis. He’s wearing a crumpled up business suit and unshaven. He has just written his name huge letters on our white board in varanleg merki. What a sight!

Það endaði allt hamingjusamlega, þó. This was a chemical company, eftir allt. A grizzled veteran employee pulled something off the shelf and, líklega í bága EPA reglugerðir, cleared the board. I managed to stay 1/2 day ahead of the class throughout the course and they gave me a good review in the end. This cemented my "pinch hitter" reputation at my company. My luggage arrived the first day, svo ég var miklu meira frambærilegur dagar tveir og þrír.

Eins og ég var að taka rauða augað heim, I was contemplating "lessons learned". There was plenty to contemplate. Communication is key. Tell clients about changes in plan. Don’t ever check your luggage at the airport if you can possibly avoid it. Bring spare "stuff" in case you do check your luggage and it doens’t make it. I think the most important lesson I learned, þó, var þetta: alltaf prófa merki í neðri vinstra horninu á hvítum borð áður en að skrifa, í stórum stöfum, "Paul Galvin".

</enda>

Due to some oddball United Airlines flights I took in the mid 90’s, I somehow ended up with an offer to transform "unused miles" into about a dozen free magazine subscriptions. That is how I ended up subscribing to Scientific American magazine.

Og hugbúnaður / ráðgjöf fólk, we encounter many difficult business requirements in our career. Most the time, við elskum fundinn þeim kröfum og í raun, it’s probably why we think this career is the best in the world. I occasionally wonder just what in the world would I have done with myself if I had been born at any other time in history. How terrible would it be to miss out on the kinds of work I get to do now, á þessum stað og tíma í sögu heimsins? Ég held: nokkuð hræðileg.

Í gegnum árin, some of the requirements I’ve faced have been extremely challenging to meet. Complex SharePoint stuff, bygging vefur vinnslu ramma byggt á non-vefur-vingjarnlegur tækni, complex BizTalk orchestrations and the like. We can all (vonandi) líta stolti baka á feril okkar og segja, "yeah, sem var erfitt einn til að leysa, en á endanum ég pwned að sumbitch!" Better yet, Jafnvel fleiri áhugaverður og gaman áskoranir bíða.

Ég held persónulega að ný minn, í þessu sambandi, er nokkuð djúpt og ég er nokkuð stolt af því (þó að ég veit konan mín mun aldrei skilja 1/20th af því). But this week, Ég var að lesa grein um að Large Hadron Collider in my Scientific American magazine and had one of those rare humbling moments where I realized that despite my "giant" staða í ákveðnum hópum eða hversu djúpt ég held vel minn reynslu, there are real giants in completely different worlds.

The people on the LHC team have some really thorny issues to manage. Consider the Moon. I don’t really think much about the Moon (þó að ég hef verið mjög grunsamlega um það síðan ég lærði að það er hægur snúningur jarðar, sem getur ekki verið gott fyrir okkur mönnum í langan tíma). En, the LHC team does have to worry. LHC’s measuring devices are so sensitive that they are affected by the Moon’s (Earth-snúningur-hægur-og-að lokum-morð-allt-líf) gravity. That’s a heck of a requirement to meet — framleiða réttar mælingar þrátt truflunum tunglsins.

Ég var að velta þessi mál þegar ég las þessa setningu: "The first level will receive and analyze data from only a subset of all the detector’s components, from which it can pick out promising events based on isolated factors such as whether an energetic muon was spotted flying out at a large angle from the beam axis." Really … ? I don’t play in that kind of sandbox and never will.

Næst þegar ég er út með nokkrum vinum, Ég ætla að hækka á ristuðu brauði til góða sem vinna á LHC, hope they don’t successfully weigh the Higgs boson particle and curse the Moon. I suggest you do the same. Það verður alveg ristað brauð 🙂

</enda>