Comments for HalWebGuy. Online Media Geek. http://halwebguy.danziger.net following the crossroads of media and technology products Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:39:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9 hourly 1 Comment on The NoSQL Movement: The Object – RDMBS Incompatability by Dominique Rabeuf http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2010/02/25/the-nosql-movement-the-object-rdmbs-incompatability/comment-page-1/#comment-65 Dominique Rabeuf Thu, 25 Feb 2010 16:39:11 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=162#comment-65 Your sample is based on use of PK/FK (Primary and Foreign keys). Mechanism largely used in RDBMS. XML Schema provide with key/keyref elements, analogous but most powerful than PK/FK in relational use case. With a simple XQuery and a very little recursive function one can retrieve nested hierarchic collections Your sample is based on use of PK/FK (Primary and Foreign keys).
Mechanism largely used in RDBMS.
XML Schema provide with key/keyref elements, analogous but most powerful than PK/FK in relational use case.
With a simple XQuery and a very little recursive function one can retrieve nested hierarchic collections

]]> Comment on The NoSQL Movement: The Object – RDMBS Incompatability by Rob http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2010/02/25/the-nosql-movement-the-object-rdmbs-incompatability/comment-page-1/#comment-64 Rob Thu, 25 Feb 2010 15:22:32 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=162#comment-64 Take a look at GT.M's natural hierarchical sparse persistent arrays. These give you two solutions to your problem. Firstly you can model many hierarchies to directly using n subscripts, but also take a look at the XML DOM example I've used in the M/Wire tutorial (http://www.mgateway.com/mwire.html) where you'll see the array structure can be used to very simply model the arbitrary level of tag nesting you get in an XML document. Is this the kind of NoSQL solution you have in mind? Take a look at GT.M’s natural hierarchical sparse persistent arrays. These give you two solutions to your problem. Firstly you can model many hierarchies to directly using n subscripts, but also take a look at the XML DOM example I’ve used in the M/Wire tutorial (http://www.mgateway.com/mwire.html) where you’ll see the array structure can be used to very simply model the arbitrary level of tag nesting you get in an XML document.

Is this the kind of NoSQL solution you have in mind?

]]> Comment on Being a Great Manager by halwebguy http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2010/02/04/being-a-great-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-57 halwebguy Sat, 06 Feb 2010 16:14:09 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=148#comment-57 @branford agreed. But, this is where it helps to be an expert on your subject manager. You can help guide the team down the right path, while keeping them empowered as well. Certainly, showing them hard evidence of why one path may be better than another is effective. Telling them "do it this way because I said so" is not. @branford agreed. But, this is where it helps to be an expert on your subject manager. You can help guide the team down the right path, while keeping them empowered as well. Certainly, showing them hard evidence of why one path may be better than another is effective. Telling them “do it this way because I said so” is not.

]]> Comment on Being a Great Manager by halwebguy http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2010/02/04/being-a-great-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-56 halwebguy Sat, 06 Feb 2010 04:09:49 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=148#comment-56 Clearly defining goals and boundaries, certainly. Offering suggestions, certainly. I wouldn't call this leading by consensus; but it's important to try to get consensus. If you want your team to work hard, care, and to have a vested interest, give them some rope. The truth is many employees stop caring and forget how to think if you're going to overrule them anyway. And besides, if I can't trust my team, why should they trust me? Clearly defining goals and boundaries, certainly. Offering suggestions, certainly. I wouldn’t call this leading by consensus; but it’s important to try to get consensus. If you want your team to work hard, care, and to have a vested interest, give them some rope. The truth is many employees stop caring and forget how to think if you’re going to overrule them anyway. And besides, if I can’t trust my team, why should they trust me?

]]> Comment on Being a Great Manager by @branford http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2010/02/04/being-a-great-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-54 @branford Fri, 05 Feb 2010 16:48:19 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=148#comment-54 great post. i think #1 really depends on the personalities on the team. but if you are hiring brilliant people, i think what you are saying makes a lot of sense. "get out of the way" and let them be brilliant. also, there has to be a lot of trust. it takes a lot of time, or the right chemistry, to build up a team that can flourish in this style. great post.
i think #1 really depends on the personalities on the team. but if you are hiring brilliant people, i think what you are saying makes a lot of sense. “get out of the way” and let them be brilliant. also, there has to be a lot of trust.
it takes a lot of time, or the right chemistry, to build up a team that can flourish in this style.

]]> Comment on Being a Great Manager by esd714 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2010/02/04/being-a-great-manager/comment-page-1/#comment-53 esd714 Fri, 05 Feb 2010 14:43:42 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=148#comment-53 Good stuff here--although I would take some issue with number one. As a manager I agree that getting suggestions from the team and letting the team find their way through a problem is key to success. But I am not sure leading by consensus is healthy. I think a leader should set the tone and boundaries--and then jump in as needed. Good stuff here–although I would take some issue with number one. As a manager I agree that getting suggestions from the team and letting the team find their way through a problem is key to success. But I am not sure leading by consensus is healthy. I think a leader should set the tone and boundaries–and then jump in as needed.

]]> Comment on News in 2015 by Michael J http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2009/02/25/news-in-2015/comment-page-1/#comment-42 Michael J Sun, 01 Mar 2009 13:03:42 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=105#comment-42 I have to most respectfully disagree. Journalists and newspapers will part ways. Journalism will move away from newspaper enterprises and thrive. Newspapers will focus on being the best physical media to amuse, entertain and educate. And to host the public discourse for geographically defined communities. 1. Printed newspapers will be virtually gone. Space based physical newspapers will thrive. They will evolve from the successful shoppers and resilient local papers today, into a new kind of product. Their information will be delivered on the net for niche audiences, in epaper for some, and on Paper for the mass market. They will stop running after the "breaking noise" and focus on nurturing real conversation about real issues - local economic development, local education, health and security. And sell lots and lots of ads to local enterprise, by streamlining their ad purchase process. 2. About 35% of newspapers will still be available, but primarily as content providers, rather than print distributors. Nope. Most newspapers will make explicit the implict reality that they don't produce much content. They will put their resouces on creating teams of three to focus on local beats. They will host conversations on the web and print excerpts of those conversation on the web, on epaper and mostly on real paper. 3. The majority of news will be consumed on a handful of social news portals, platforms similar to Facebook but specializing in news, allowing layout flexibility and hyper-localization. It will not be Google, Yahoo, or Microsoft. News is consumed. Narratives are read. Readers are a the next niche market that is getting ready to explode. The Kindle 2.0 is only the first step in organizing the disorganized market of readers. 4. These portals will monetize with a combination of advertising and subscriptions. The portals will be a part of the full information package that users will pay for. Big advertising is a dead end. Local advertising is a growing market. 5. Subscriptions will come in different forms: All content, all content from certain content providers (formerly known as newspapers), and subscriptions limited by usage quotas (# of articles, etc). I still don't believe that people will pay for "general news." They will pay for various reasons. Mostly because it is actionable intelligence that their competition might get before them. Financial news fits in this bin. But few other things do. Sorry for the long post. But you did ask for "what do you think" I have to most respectfully disagree.
Journalists and newspapers will part ways. Journalism will move away from newspaper enterprises and thrive. Newspapers will focus on being the best physical media to amuse, entertain and educate.
And to host the public discourse for geographically defined communities.

1. Printed newspapers will be virtually gone.

Space based physical newspapers will thrive. They will evolve from the successful shoppers and resilient local papers today, into a new kind of product. Their information will be delivered on the net for niche audiences, in epaper for some, and on Paper for the mass market. They will stop running after the “breaking noise” and focus on nurturing real conversation about real issues – local economic development, local education, health and security. And sell lots and lots of ads to local enterprise, by streamlining their ad purchase process.

2. About 35% of newspapers will still be available, but primarily as content providers, rather than print distributors.

Nope. Most newspapers will make explicit the implict reality that they don’t produce much content. They will put their resouces on creating teams of three to focus on local beats. They will host conversations on the web and print excerpts of those conversation on the web, on epaper and mostly on real paper.

3. The majority of news will be consumed on a handful of social news portals, platforms similar to Facebook but specializing in news, allowing layout flexibility and hyper-localization. It will not be Google, Yahoo, or Microsoft.

News is consumed. Narratives are read. Readers are a the next niche market that is getting ready to explode. The Kindle 2.0 is only the first step in organizing the disorganized market of readers.

4. These portals will monetize with a combination of advertising and subscriptions.

The portals will be a part of the full information package that users will pay for. Big advertising is a dead end. Local advertising is a growing market.

5. Subscriptions will come in different forms: All content, all content from certain content providers (formerly known as newspapers), and subscriptions limited by usage quotas (# of articles, etc).

I still don’t believe that people will pay for “general news.” They will pay for various reasons. Mostly because it is actionable intelligence that their competition might get before them. Financial news fits in this bin. But few other things do.

Sorry for the long post. But you did ask for “what do you think”

]]> Comment on RIP Rocky Mountain News by halwebguy http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2009/02/27/rip-rocky-mountain-news/comment-page-1/#comment-44 halwebguy Sat, 28 Feb 2009 12:54:37 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=109#comment-44 @Francesco Interesting perspective. I think the newspapers need to fix the newspapers, but they're up against a big challenge: a bad economy, and an online business model that doesn't work. These sites get tremendous traffic, but advertising alone can't keep them going on the Internet, in a world saturated with publishers. It's a difficult time to change the model, but as more papers go out of business, the necessary changes are inevitable. Just late, but better late than never. @Francesco Interesting perspective. I think the newspapers need to fix the newspapers, but they’re up against a big challenge: a bad economy, and an online business model that doesn’t work. These sites get tremendous traffic, but advertising alone can’t keep them going on the Internet, in a world saturated with publishers. It’s a difficult time to change the model, but as more papers go out of business, the necessary changes are inevitable. Just late, but better late than never.

]]> Comment on RIP Rocky Mountain News by Francesco Gallarotti http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2009/02/27/rip-rocky-mountain-news/comment-page-1/#comment-43 Francesco Gallarotti Sat, 28 Feb 2009 05:03:20 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=109#comment-43 I have to say that when you posted the link to their homepage this morning, I watched the whole thing and was very touched. Then while i was driving to work listening to NPR as usual, I heard all the most recent bad news about Citygroup and Bank of america and got really upset... why is the government helping those and the car companies so much and doesn't do anything with all these smaller and to my opinion more important businesses? According to the government we should all be dumb (no more newspapers) and driving around in gas-gulping cars that shouldn't even be considered an option anymore... What a sad sad place to live... I have to say that when you posted the link to their homepage this morning, I watched the whole thing and was very touched. Then while i was driving to work listening to NPR as usual, I heard all the most recent bad news about Citygroup and Bank of america and got really upset… why is the government helping those and the car companies so much and doesn’t do anything with all these smaller and to my opinion more important businesses? According to the government we should all be dumb (no more newspapers) and driving around in gas-gulping cars that shouldn’t even be considered an option anymore…
What a sad sad place to live…

]]> Comment on News in 2015 by halwebguy http://halwebguy.danziger.net/2009/02/25/news-in-2015/comment-page-1/#comment-41 halwebguy Sat, 28 Feb 2009 01:55:14 +0000 http://halwebguy.danziger.net/?p=105#comment-41 I wouldn't wonder, I'm certain they will (online anyway). I wouldn’t wonder, I’m certain they will (online anyway).

]]>