First, make sure you define your project with the right people. In the beginning of this project, I was working based on a series of conversations with my client’s top executive. The top executive and I were on the same page, but the two directors were confused about what the project was doing. When I re-defined the project with the three of them together, we all started working towards the same goals.

Secondly, pick the smallest team that can be effective to meet your goals. This client has a very strong team based culture. While this leads to a high degree of staff empowerment, it also sometimes means that everyone expects to be involved in every decision. Knowing that previous projects had become bogged down in this bureaucracy, we comprised our core team of the strongest subject matter experts available. As we worked through various components of the system, we pulled in additional resources where necessary and made sure all the team members were communicating well to their colleagues. This allowed us to move rapidly through requirements definition, application testing, and finally projet approval.

Third, make sure you have clear expectations for your team. This may involve teaching your team how to do their work since they may not have participated in a similar project before. Even worse, they may have participated in a similar project that didn’t function well and have developed bad habits. On our team, we stressed that the team members were not expected to know everything. But they were expected to know who needed to be involved in each piece of the project and to pull those people in as appropriate. They were also expected to keep their supervisors and colleagues informed about project progress and to use their supervisors and colleagues to help resolve any issues.

Fourth, it is imperative to get the right technical skills on board. In Billings, there is a serious shortage of experienced programmers. So we used remote programmers through a service called oDesk. I managed the requirements definition, communication with the programmers, and primary quality assurance. This ensured that the client’s staff on the team were focused on their responsibilities…the functional aspects of the system. The approach allowed me to tap into the global talent pool to find the right skills, and helped my client keep development costs under control.

Finally, consistently confirm your understandings of your projects priorities (Cost vs. Time vs. Scope). In this case, the client strongly preferred a consistent monthly cost and a full set of application features to delivering on a specific date. As a result, we moved a little slower than was technically possible. When we had to adjust the schedule, I confirmed again with the client that their preferences had not changed. In the end, we delivered within a few weeks of our best estimate (on a 14 month project) and the client was very satisfied.

Most of these learnings weren’t necessarily new to me and they may not be new to you. But looking back, they were probably the key items that made the project successful. Hopefully, they’ll help you in your next project.

To start a remote support session, you simply login to your account on the Copilot website and enter the person’s email address. Then you click a button to install a little application and the other person clicks the link in their email. Within seconds you are viewing their desktop and able to work on their machine just like you were there.

I don’t generally do desktop support so I’ve signed up for the pay-as-you-go plan. This only costs me $0.25 per minute. There are also unlimited use plans starting at $19.95/month. Those plans allow you to setup computers you might regularly access with one-click access so you don’t have to get a new access code every time.If you ever need to access remote computer, I’d highly recommend giving Copilot a try.

Wireless network operators have historically offered phones on the cheap with the stipulation that you sign a 1-2 year contract for their service. In addition to that lock-in period, the operator typically cripples the phone in areas that may compete with their own offerings. For example, Verizon cripples the Bluetooth features on their phones so that you can’t move pictures back and forth between your phone and your PC without going over their data network. And their Wi-Fi enabled phones certainly wouldn’t support calls over a VOIP service such as Skype.

So how will this affect the typical business owner?

• You will pick your phone based on the features that you need (not that the operator wants you to have).
• You will pick your wireless operator based on the best service available in your area.
• Phones may cost more since they’re not being subsidized by a service plan. But if other carriers follow suit, you will see manufacturers producing various editions of the same phone for different types of users.
• Service plans should cost less since they’re not being used to subsidize handsets (yeah, right!). But you may see operators trying to lock you into longer contract periods, exploring plans with differing service levels, or even completely divesting themselves of certain lines (e.g., VCAST won’t survive that long).

I’m ecstatic about this change. I think the wireless network operators have impeded progress for too long. It’s about to change.

As you know, I’m a fan of Microsoft products. There are tons of Vista detractors out there, and the “horror stories” of incompatible printers and other devices are well publicized. These complaints usually come from Apple and Linux fans that like to think their preferred platforms are the best. But while Microsoft has to build software that everyone can use and for which any vendor can provide hardware, the reality is that Apple and Linux can’t (or choose not to) live up to that mission.

So since last Monday, I’ve been using Microsoft’s Windows Vista Business. And I have to say that I honestly don’t know what people are so up in arms about. My machine operates much faster under Vista, and I like most parts of the new interface. The sidebar is nice, but not really a game changer. I do like how it’s there on the main screen instead of hiding like Apple’s version does. The one piece of software I had that was designed pre-Vista (QuickBooks) runs just fine in compatibility mode.

I have had a few problems:

• The backup and restore wizard is poor. Vista only allows you to select types of files to backup, not specific locations. So I’m using the software that comes with my external hard drive to backup only those files that I don’t have redirected to my server.
• My remote desktop connection to one client was REALLY slow. Here’s a great explanation of the problem and the fix.
• Symantec’s pcAnywhere 12.0 wouldn’t install on Vista. Kudos to Symantec for not only getting me the version 12.1 with no hassle at all, but following up a few days later to make sure it was running ok.

And there are a few annoyances:

• User account control was distracting. Prompting me two times every time I do some type of file operation is a little retarded. I’ve turned that off.
• There is now a Contacts folder as part of the user profile. It’s meant to be used with the new Windows Mail client (previously Outlook Express). But there’s no integration with Outlook so it’s just an extra empty folder.
• The new Windows Explorer doesn’t have an “up folder” navigation button.

Overall, nothing to really be alarmed about. Given the improved performance I get while working all day, I’m actually happy I did the upgrade.

Question: You run a destination type SMB like Starbucks.  How do you use the WiFi service you are offering them to build a community of your customers?  Do you allow them to engage each other a la Facebook or MySpace?  Do you give them the opportunity to "speak" to you directly?

But I recommended they hold on the custom development.  They needed to evaluate MS Sharepoint’s capabilities before proceeding.  Why?  The basic corporate intranet portal has been built 100+ times already.  Sharepoint, Plone, Liferay, JBoss, DotNetNuke and many others are decent out-of-the-box foundations for an internal site.  So there’s just no reason to pursue custom development for this type of project. 

But why Sharepoint?  This client is also upgrading their core enterprise system.  Turns out that the system based on a MS platform and uses Sharepoint for document management.  Doesn’t it make a lot of sense to evaluate whether or not the platform used by your core enterprise system will work for the rest of your needs as well?

Right now, they seem to like Sharepoint and we’re now doing a test project to prove it to the company.  If the test fails, there are other options.  But custom development for an intranet should be a last resort.

Here’s the rub with Symphony and the other MS Office alternatives.  Microsoft Office reached dominance not because of the functions that your average user cares about and that every basic office suite does well.  The tools were widely adopted because introductory level developers (like me) were able to quickly build department level applications that helped improve staff productivity.  In the absence of any real developer tools, I don’t believe Lotus Symphony or any other MS Office alternative has a shot at being anything more than a niche product.

I hate that I didn’t do a decent evaluation of the Lotus tools.  But the reality is that I spend my time working with tools that fit the environments my clients have in place.  As long as organizations have one person who has gone past the basic data entry functions of Excel, I will never convince them that an Office alternative will work for them.  And if they’re so small that they don’t have a serious investment in MS Office, why would I ever recommend they start out using tools that can’t be extended as their needs grow?

The only thing I’d add to his post is that you don’t have to limit your up front research to looking at existing sites.  There are thousands of free or very inexpensive site templates that can be modified to fit your tastes.  Look on oswd.org or Google "website templates" for tons of resources.  Don’t spend time or money reinventing the wheel.

I have a love/hate relationship with MS Access.  Way back when, I spent a lot of time doing Microsoft Office development and Access was a favorite tool of mine.  I liked that I could easily hook up to the enterprise databases, pull the information I needed and integrate it with any other application I happened to build. 

But people who do Access development full time tend to get trapped into that box.  When the task becomes greater than the tool, they simply find ways to make it work.  And that leads to problems.

Nowadays I spend a lot of time supporting an Access database that has outgrown its skin.  I’m rebuilding the application with a SQL Server back end, and ASP.NET and Sharepoint on the front end.  But it’s a really slow process because there are so many business rules hard coded into the VBA.  Identifying the code that has to be there versus what was done inefficiently is a real chore.  And all the while I spend time helping users through crashes, data corruption, and reports that aren’t tying out.

So, here’s my advice of the day.  Use Access.  Or Dabble or Zoho.  They’re great tools and fill a need.  But when you need more than a couple users, have rigorous security requirements, need sophisticated data entry forms, or have complex reporting needs, it’s time for a different tool.  Don’t put this off.  Your application will only become more complex over time.  And you’ll end up spending a lot of time and money supporting the application instead of improving your business.