An Exercise in Analytics: Using Microsoft SandDance to Visualize Trends at CraftConf

I’ve been lucky to attend every CraftConf Budapest since its inception in 2014.  It has always been a mind-expanding experience, with a healthy mix of established and newcomer speakers from the tech industry worldwide. Although Craft, as the name suggests, is focused on Software Craftsmanship, the specific topics of talks vary each year as industry trends fluctuate. I was interested in taking a deeper look at trends of technologies and paradigms as they become more or less popular over time, and to find those, if any, whose popularity has remained more or less constant.

While doing some research into data analytics for a project at work, I came across Microsoft SandDance. My interest in the CraftConf data was the perfect opportunity to teach myself SandDance (and some Python as well). So I put together a quick experiment: Using Martin’s excellent tutorial on Web Scraping with Python as a reference, I wrote  a Python script that scrapes CraftConf’s talk descriptions (using archives from 2014, 2015 and 2016) and produces a CSV file of the most frequently occurring words. Obviously standard English language words like pronouns, days of the week, and so on are ignored. What we’re left with is a list of top 100 words for each year, and their frequencies of occurrence, which can be visualized  in SandDance.

Although this approach is quick and more or less effective, the limitation is that it may not accurately reflect trends for phrases like “Agile Methodology” — the word frequency of “agile” may not be the same as that of “methodology”. But that’s something that can be worked on later. So although I would take this as a good indicator (which meets my purpose), I wouldn’t use the analysis outcomes as a serious reference.

What the Data Tells Us

Here are some interesting findings from the first pass (150 of the most frequent words selected, out of those 100 produced after filtering out common and punctuated words):

  • “Product” showed up 26 times in 2015 and nearly doubled to 51 in 2016 (a growing trend: no talk, some talk, twice the talk…)
  • “Functional” [programming] appeared 16 times in 2014, and not in the other 2 years (something that’s coming and going?)
  • Similarly, “Architecture” showed up respectively 15, 37 and 23 times (up and down)
  • “DevOps” was an equally hot trend in 2014 and 2015 but didn’t show up in 2016 (presumably because the hype is over)
  • “Microservices” appears 29 times in 2016, but didn’t show up in the previous years (so there is a recent spike in popularity)

 

CraftConf2016

Tim Steigert’s Closing Keynote at CraftConf 2016

See for Yourself

As a fun exercise in data visualization and trend analysis, I encourage you to try it out for yourself, using the CSV file produced by my script. To start with:

  • Load the dataset: Dataset > Web > CSV file (Keep “First line is header” checked)
  • Set the URL to the CSV file link above, and click Load
  • View as: Column
  • X Axis: Keyword
  • Sum by, Facet by: None
  • Color by: Keyword
  • Sort by: Frequency
  • Set the X axis bins to: 100

The typical way to drill down using SandDance would be:

  • Select a keyword (say “lean”)
  • Click Isolate. Everything else gets filtered out (note the “Filtered” count increased from 0 to 2)
  • Now you can check “Details”, or “Facet by…”, for example
  • To go back, simply click “Filtered” to clear the selection
CraftConfSanddanceArchAnalysis

Isolating the keyword “Architecture” in SandDance

Isolating the “Other” keyword will reveal a whole lot of keywords that don’t show up in the first 100 bins. You can also take the SandDance tour (by clicking on Tour) and discover many other interesting ways of playing with SandDance.

You can find the source code in my Git Repository WordFreqCount. If you find it useful, please feel free to reuse, derive from or improve it. Note that credit goes to Martin for the original code on web scraping using Python and Beautiful Soup, which I largely adapted from. And of course, thanks to Microsoft for making the elegant and powerful SandDance available for free!

Advertisements

“Agile Architecture”: Is Your Product’s Architecture Simply a Reflection of its Release Schedule?

After recently reading George Fairbanks’ Just Enough Software Architecture and obtaining 90% in my TOGAF 9.1 Foundation Certification exam in Enterprise Architecture, I’ve naturally been thinking about Software Architecture a lot. The other day a friend and I were talking about a typical scenario, involving large scale products with multiple sprint teams on a tight delivery schedule. I will over-simplify and over-generalize it here:

The Scenario

Let’s say you’re building a product which requires a feature that a snapshot can be exported to a PNG file. This is typically what would happen:

  • Product Owner: “As a user, I want to export snapshot to PNG, so that I can email it as an attachment to the Finance Department”
  • Story is added to Product Backlog, prioritized during the Sprint Grooming and estimated in the Sprint Planning
  • Developer Dinesh starts working on it, he adds the Export to PNG feature, it is demo’d at the end of the Sprint and everyone is happy

The feature and product iteration is shipped, customers start using it, the product team goes back to juggling new features and bugs. Priorities and sprint teams change. Somewhere down the line, another requirement comes up:

  • Product Owner: “As a user, I want to export snapshot to PDF, so that I can archive it in the Document Management system” (Don’t ask why the two systems can’t work with the same format).
  • Story is added, prioritized and estimated. This time though, Dinesh isn’t around (he’s either on vacation, promoted, no longer in the company or simply more focused on another aspect of the product)
  • Developer Gilfoyle starts working on this feature. From this point on, 3 things can happen:
    • Rearchitecture: An experienced developer or architect recognizes the potential of code reuse/refactor/rearchitecture between the two implementations. A common interface emerges, common functionality is moved up and specific functionality is moved to concrete classes. Note that:
      • Code is refactored
      • Some previously existing code is even thrown away
    • Technical Debt is accrued: Gilfoyle has limited time to implement the new feature; on the UI side the “Export to…” menu selections show up users would expect, but the internal implementation is disjoint. The code is not clean (but does the job), the Export functionality is not unified into a single interface and there is code duplication.
      •  In some of the stakeholders’ minds, code has been “reused” from the previous implementation, but in reality it has been copy-pasted (imitation being the best form of flattery towards Dinesh)
      • The team and PO might even recognize the Technical Debt and add it to the backlog, to be dealt with in the future at a lower priority (although that tends to lead towards a Bottomless Backlog)

In both cases, layers emerge in software over time as features are added and the product evolves. However, the first case has architectural layers and the second exhibits feature layers: In extreme cases, you might even be able to infer the Product Backlog by looking at the order in which features were added.

The Analysis

Some thoughts:

  • The Technical Debt Trap“: Doc Norton explained it very well at CraftConf 2016 (video link): (a) Most of what we have come to call “Technical Debt” is actually code cruft, and (b) “clean, testable code is a pre-requisite to being able to pay back Technical Debt”.
  • Show me the $: While a Product Owner may have limited influence over where budget is spent, a Product Manager may be in a better position to limit the long term negative effects of decisions made within the scope of individual sprints
  • One size does not fit all: Complex products or long development cycles, must be overseen by an experienced Architect or Development Lead, who advises the PO, PM and other decision makers
  • Stakeholders pay for the product, not the code: For stakeholders coming from a more traditional software engineering background, it may seem like throwing away (or refactoring) code is a questionable decision, because money was spent on producing it. This thinking must be erased by clarifying the benefits of a more robust and maintainable design.

The Solution (Maybe)

In summary: Features, as seen by the business, are not always the same as features, as seen by the developers. I’m tending to think the solution might be to maintain two backlogs: a business-oriented Product Backlog, and an architecture-oriented Technical Backlog. The latter would go into the details of how the business needs will be met at a technical level, driven by the objectives of overall cohesiveness, maintainability and constant reduction of Technical Debt. Here’s how I imagine it:2xBacklogs

Note that the technical effort to achieve a given amount of business features, is more than what it would be if the team worked off of a single backlog. This is simply because the Technical Backlog takes into account the additional effort of refactoring/rewriting, which is normally not covered in the typical Product Backlog.

I’m curious about what you think, please leave a comment below or get in touch on Twitter: @survivalcrziest.

(PS: Here’s a tip: VCS-based Software Analysis by Adam Tornhill)

Update: Prioritization of Items in the Technical Backlog

Based on some of the readers’ feedback, I would like to clarify how I intend the system to be used:

  1. The top of the Technical Backlog is prioritized / groomed based on (a) “Technical Value” and (b) budget and schedule constraints (“effort”).
    •  Technical Value here is defined as the value delivered by the technical solution towards meeting the needs of the [prioritized] Product Backlog.
  2. Items may be to the Technical Backlog not just based on the insertion of new features in the Product Backlog, but also based on technical reviews / retrospectives where it is identified that an architectural change is required (e.g. for purposes of maintainability or compliance).
  3. The items pushed to the bottom of the Technical Backlog thus represent Technical Debt.

 

CES 2016: From the Fringes

The Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas is the premier trade show for tech product previews and release announcements, going as far back as the VCR in 1970 to Driverless Cars in 2013*. This year the CES featured about 3800 exhibitors, spanning 2.47 million sq. ft. spread out over 3 locations** visited by 170,000 media and industry professionals — and I was privileged to count myself amongst them. Featuring keynote addresses from Intel, Netflix, IBM, Samsung, nVidia, Volkswagen and other big names, a lot has been written, presented and shared on mainstream as well as social media about the 4 day event. This chart sums it up the hype pretty well:

Source: BuzzRadar.com

Source: BuzzRadar, CTA

I decided to share some of my views from the fringes, rather than the trenches — there is no point in rinsing and repeating what is already out there, nor do I have any delusions about the value of my personal opinion about tech that enables your car to count how many oranges are left in your fridge (yes, it was demoed, with voice control).

Oculus_c

The Oculus Rift demo was by far the hardest to get into — there was a line, a line to get in the line, and a third holding area. Eventually I made it on the last day, and it took me about 20 min to recover from the simulator sickness caused by piloting EVE Valkyrie’s spacecraft from a living room chair. I still felt there were rough edges and the HTC Vive was by far a more refined, immersive and truly flawless experience. The new Sony PlayStation 4 VR was quite impressive as well: I could lean out of a moving car and look behind me, and the granularity of control was so good I could rotate knobs on the car stereo. OSVR.org based devices were quite popular too, and some others that caught my eye were Virtuix Omni active VR platform, AntVR’s Holodeck concept and ICAROS‘ EUR 10,000 gym equipment that lets you fly around in a virtual world powered by your own body. Certainly beats playing first person shooters wearing VR googles on a treadmill, or riding a virtual horse on a exercycle.

There were tons of clones (mostly based on Gear VR) and drones. Augmented Reality seems to be gaining ground, but despite solutions like the Sony SmartEyeglass and Daqri Smart Helmet, VR seems to be more popular of the two. It’s worth noting that virtually every VR or AR demo was running on Unity3D content, including those at NASA and IEEE’s booths.

I also tried my hand at racing simulators of various scales: from small VR setups, to actual cars mounted on motion platforms, to a massive 4×4 grid of 55″ OLEDs in front of a force feedback seat rig. There were several interesting display technologies on show: 3D without glasses, transparent (scaling up to entire walls), curved and Samsung’s modular, edge-blending display tech straight out of a sci-fi movie. Avegant’s Glyph might turn the display industry on it’s head, though, much like the way it’s worn.

SamsungModular_c

 

On the automotive side, voice, gesture and intent based user interfaces seem to be gaining ground. Also making an appearance were adaptive user interfaces and improvements in sensor fusion, self-learning and self-driving techniques. There were tons of wearables, 3D printing and home automation booths. The two core themes seemed to be a maturing of the ecosystem (just about everything built on top of something else, not too many technologies solving problems from scratch) and apps for doing things that don’t need apps, like locking your front door. You’d think we would stop there, but no:

On the social innovation side, I found GrandPad, Casio’s 2.5D printing and the Genworth R70i Aging Experience very thoughtful. Besides these, I liked Mixfader‘s idea of an MVP slider for mobile DJs: after all, the crossfader is the main thing that requires precise tactile control, everything else can be relegated to the screen. Also impressive was Sony’s line of 409,600 ISO see-completely-in-the-dark cameras. And this is now a thing:

LifeSpaceUX_c

You’d also probably be able to find a lot of beautiful photos of Las Vegas on the Internet, so let me leave you with this video of a not-so-common Las Vegas activity that I squeezed in on the last day, courtesy of DreamRacing.com (very fringe-y because I picked a Nissan over a Ferrari). Thanks for reading!

* Apple, Google and Microsoft have their own tech events and despite the Xbox (2001) and Android devices (2010) being unveiled at CES, these companies tend to keep their product announcements exclusive to their own events. So no Hololens at CES.

** „Tech East (Las Vegas Convention Center), Tech West (Sands/Expo at the Venetian,  The Palazzo, Wynn and Encore) and Tech South (Aria and Vdara)

Prezi’s 7 Year Itch?

This has been a really hard post for me to write, because some of the brilliant engineers and designers at Prezi are my professional acquaintances and/or good friends. And that’s the very reason I’m writing it – real friends tell it like it is. I’ve been putting this off since I first started using Prezi almost a year ago. But now that I have experienced it in free, Edu and Pro flavors, and created some pretty complex ones, the initial tiny niggles now seemed to have, let’s say, zoomed in (pun intended). So Prezi people: please consider this well-intended motivation.

Prezi was founded in 2009, and I imagine at that time it must have felt something like Wolfenstein 3D: technologically ground-breaking and in some circles, controversial (you may recall Microsoft tried to acquire id Software). Powerpoint needed to be killed, because it enforced linear thinking – and Prezi was the answer. Yet, 6 years later, linear thinking is still popular:

With 60 mn users (and 160 mn -/+ 18% Prezis created, depending on which part of their website you refer to), obviously they’ve got something right. Right enough that they are able to sustain an international presence on a single product. That rarely happens at this scale, and I suppose it is something to be admired.

The Platform

The in-browser experience is brilliant. Works well and virtually eliminates the entry barrier.  I tried using the desktop variant, Prezi for Mac, once. Just once. I found that it in terms of usability, it didn’t offer any major advantages over the website. But the real problem was that it kept false-flagging sync conflicts between the “local” and “cloud” versions. Eventually I decided the fake stress wasn’t worth it and switched back to the browser.

You may not have this dilemma if you would like to use the free power of Linux to share your ideas – Prezi doesn’t support it. (To be fair, they more than make up for this by actively promoting the tech and open source community in Budapest, by regularly organizing/hosting events, meetups and conferences).

There is an iPad version that “enables users to pan, and pinch to zoom in or out of their media” (That’s perfect, because that’s pretty much what an iPad is good for, anyway).

What I really wish for is the ability to resize the slide view pane on the left, so I can identify and jump to specific slides. And multi-select, especially for reordering (use the Force of the Shift Key). I would also like to mark some sections so I can focus on certain areas for preparation. Or even skip straight to one depending on how the conversation is flowing.

I mentioned stress earlier. You can quite easily recreate it by using 2-finger zoom gesture on a Mac. It’s not very precise and often ends up being a lot more than you’d expect. I once had to spend hours fixing my slides when a select-move-zoom operation didn’t go as planned. I learnt the hard way to stick to the zoom buttons and not use gestures.

And finally, it all runs on Flash. Yes, even now.

Features

The undo/redo feature also has a bit of a mind of its own. For simple operations it usually works fine, but when you’re in the flow and make a mistake, it often does the thing you’d least expect. Infinite undo/redo shouldn’t be that hard to implement either, considering everything is an object with attributes, anyway. What would be really nice, though, is some kind of checkpoints — major versions that you can roll back to, branch out of, or share with someone (e.g. numbered drafts). Because, 2015.

The guides when moving stuff around are hard to see. Too often they blend into the background, especially e.g. if the background has a grid. Get those ants marching again!

I also miss the ability to add notes, although what I would really expect is a more modern way of representing “prompts”, in a way that would be intuitive for presenters.

Warning: Brutal Honesty Ahead

Try this test, Prezi folks: create a new Prezi, single slide only, and export it to PDF.

  • Number of pages expected: 1
  • Number of pages found: 2.  The first page is always duplicated during export, regardless of number of slides.
  • Test result: FAIL.

Really, nobody noticed this in all these years?

Or that the image borders provided by the Aviary plugin are too thick and can’t be adjusted? (I trust you when you say my “private”, potentially proprietary/copyrighted images are truly private, even though there seems to be no obvious ToS or protection mechanism).

I’ve had Aviary and PDF export error out on me on a couple of occasions. I can live with that. But must you call them IO_ERRORs? That sounds more like the server ran out of disk space or something. And to non-programmers like my Dad, it probably looks like “ten errors” misspelt.

Nice to have: compressed PDF, with lowered quality. Try printing a 60 MB PDF some time, or re-uploading it — when just a link would have sufficed.

For that matter, why limit social sharing options to only to Facebook? How about Twitter, LinkedIn and dare I say, SlideShare integration as well? (PS: Do people really share presentations on Facebook? How about a good old “Email this” shortcut?)

There is tremendous potential to use Prezi as a content generation tool if it allowed exporting to video, or directly to YouTube (and/or Vimeo). Think tutorials, troubleshooting guides, walkthroughs and just plain not having to talk over and over again — present it, record it, share it. Other people seem to have the same idea, too.

And if only there was a way to present to the second screen, so in a presenter view (or just Edit mode) I can see what’s coming next and how I’m doing with my timing.

Use Your Imagination

sod2

Animated GIFs are still the quickest way of demonstrating processes in action, for example. Importing Google Spreadsheets and converting them into graphs within the editor. Powerful timelines like TimeGlider. Simple maps like OpenHeatMap. Leveraging the zooming and object hierarchy features to build a MindMap mode (which may even serve as a foundation for the final Prezi). And why limit the zooming and rotating to 2 dimensions only? I would love to make a Prezi with 6 slides, each represented on a face of a cube which can be rotated in 3D space. After all, the future of storytelling is going to be virtual and immersive.

(Here’s an idea: API and plugins).

Prezi is great, but that’s no reason to not be even greater.

(Or just release the Kraken: make it open source, let us fork it and watch how people use the platform to build even more clever ideas for telling their stories).

 

 

 

Amuse UX Conference, Budapest

Last week, I had the privilege of being part of a group attending the first edition of AmuseConf on behalf of our company. Amuse is “an international conference for anyone interested in how to design and develop successful products that users love”. It’s organized by the same good folks that bring us the outstanding CraftConf year after year, sponsored primarily by Prezi and UStream (and SAP in case of Amuse). They did a near-perfect job, with only minor glitches with the seating and catering on the first day. Considering that the Big Data oriented CrunchConf was also literally next door, the event was practically flawless. Fast, uninterrupted WiFi and no food options for vegetarians/vegans remained a hallmark this organizing team (even though Tom Illmensee, event MC is himself vegetarian 😉 ).

(BTW, if you’re wondering why so many tech conferences are being hosted in Budapest, the event’s WiFi password should give you a hint):

20151103_083708867_iOS

510 attendees from 32 countries (as far away as Australia) made Amuse a roaring success, as did its impressive lineup of Speakers27% of the speakers were women, which is great for a tech conference — I hope next year we have even more!

Below is a summary of the talks I found the most relevant to my work. But by no means does that mean you should skip the other talks… depending on where you are and what you’re doing, you might be interested in some of the eclectic topics covered such as:

  • Designing web interfaces for children by Trine Falbe
  • Conducting research outside “sample of convenience” by Bill Selman from Mozilla Foundation
  • Design Thinking by Tobias Haug of SAP (my favorite quote: “Innovation = Execution x Creativity”)
  • How to get your dream UX job by Andrew Doherty of Google (worth checking out just for his mad presentation skills)
  • The Ethical Designer by Cennydd Bowles
  • Storytelling in a multidevice landscape by Anna Dahlstrom

Design Equilibrium

By Jonathan Lupo

Jonathan opened the conference with a very engaging talk drawing parallels between businesses and ecosystems: a “balanced exchange of value between Actors, Enterprise and Brand”. He gave practical examples citing the application of Lynn Shostack’s work on Service Blueprinting to a transformation in the healthcare industry. I strongly encourage viewing his inspiring talk on YouTube.

His core suggestion is a separation of Product Design from Service Design. The latter “fills in whitespaces between points of [rich] engagement provided by products”, helping to restore balance to the overall experience, and hence the business ecosystem. This is the real intangible value of services, as opposed to products.

He also proposed the concept of an “Engagement Model”: a framework to contextualize all the data a business collects.

UX: Design as a Science

By Joel Marsh, author of the UX Crash Course

Joel’s key message was that “Scientific UX Design is reproducible”: essentially drawing on the principles of the Lean Startup and applying them to the UX domain. His presentation was one of the most popular and engaging ones, and his quotes and examples garnered a lot tons of positive feedback. One thing that struck me was his exposition on the two types of creativity: Creative expression and creative problem solving. He noted that an over-applicability of creative expression can make you feel good as a designer, but result in an over-designed and bloated product:

ArtVsDesign

Another talk I would highly recommend watching when it comes out on UStream.tv.

Making Dog Food a Part of Your Balanced Diet

By Toby Sterrett

Toby used his work at Simple Bank to highlight the pros and cons of “eating your own dogfood”. The initial employees used the app themselves, and one of the downsides was that the missed revelation that users of such a smooth app had to deal with a paper form-based process to close their account, which took up to 20 days.

Another inspiring talk that you should definitely check out, full of quotes of wisdom like:

  • “Delight is design’s superpower”
  • A past discussion on Leadership strategy: “Build a shared vision, get the **** out of the way”
  • “UX is not about throwing technology at a problem, but throwing people at a problem”

On the other hand, Simple A/B tested as many as 16 variations of their login page (for more examples, check out UserOnboard.com).

Live posters being created by @remarker_eu

Live posters being created by @remarker_eu

How We Built Hotjar and Onboarded 50k Users in a Year

By Dr. David Darmanin

David used practical examples from Hotjar to support his model of “Drivers, Barriers and Hooks” when dealing with site visitors. He also put a quirky twist on some timeless wisdom:

The two most amazing insights for me were:

  • Hotjar captures every single customer interaction on a Trello board, and uses that feedback to prioritize their features.
    • They also make their roadmap public, which demonstrates their commitment and at the same time reduces enquiries about feature requests
  • They use the income from their paid customers to fund the creative freedom to build features for their free customers

The Invisible Interface: Designing the Screenless Experience

By Avi Itzkovich

Avi, founder of UXSalon, opened with a discourse on recent editions of Microsoft Productivity Future Vision. From there he led the discussion on towards a future without bigger and wider screens (which wouldn’t require “superhuman arm strength”):

  • “The most profound technologies are the ones that become invisible” 
    • Like automatically opening sliding doors
  • “Voice UI is the future”
  • “Gesture control is here to stay, but not on screens”

The Best Interface is No Interface

By Golden Krishna

Golden surmised that we are all “chipping away at digital chores”, and we don’t have to be “slaves to screens”. He has laid the foundations of the #NoUI movement with his book“The Best Interface is No Interface”. His excellent talk (slides here) was supported by book reading and real examples. Also, don’t forget to check out his accompanying toolkit on “how to create elegant solutions with no screens”.

For further inspiration to join the movement,  take a look at his Producthunt collection of “interfaces that require little or no time with screens”.

Magical UX and the Internet of Things

By Josh Clark

Josh opened with an announcement of his book release: “Designing for Touch”. His presentation was literally magical, complete with a wand, to the point that he managed to tie in together excerpts from preceding talks and put the whole conference in perspective. I found a similar slidedeck from one of his previous talks here, and I highly recommend taking a look at it while we wait for the official conference videos to come up on Ustream.tv. It was a treasure trove of out-of-the box examples like:

  •  Augmented REality Sandtable (ARES), which literally turns dirt into a high-tech, military-grade user interface… using not much more than a Kinect and projector
  • Grab Magic, which brings superpowers to data transfer
  • Propeller Health, which connects Asthma inhalers to phones for health monitoring

Josh’s key message was “interaction at the point of inspiration”: that we should think of “the whole world is an interface, just like it has always been”. He proposed “thereables” instead of wearables: bits of smart technology in the physical space where we would expect to interact with them, not something we burden ourselves by carrying or wearing all day long. To this end, he suggested that “the smartphone is Magic Wand 1.0 for everyone” and we should start thinking of it as just more than a screen.

IMG_4185

Regarding user interfaces, he had 3 bits of advice that I found remarkable:

  • “Technology should amplify our humanity”
  • “We shouldn’t educate users on how technology works, unless we really *have* to”
  • “Honor intention, don’t assume it”

Josh ended with a call to action:

Like this one.

 

 

 

 

 

Craft Conf 2015, Day 3

Continued from Day 2, here is a summary of talks I attended on Day 3:

From the Monolith to Microservices: Lessons from Google and eBay

By Randy Shoup | Video | Slides

Another eye-opening presentation with valuable insights, such as the fact that [a big organization like Google] doesn’t need architects, it just needs standardized communication and standardized interfaces. And that one of the biggest mistakes people make with microservices is reflecting the provider’s model instead of the consumer’s model. I highly recommend his talk, because it is based on the analysis of several Silicon Valley giants, successful either in the past or the present.

Interaction Driven Design

By Sandro Mancuso | Video | Slides

Sandro’s presentation was full of real examples rather than just theory. I had never heard of the Walking Skeleton before. It was an interesting intersection of DDD (Domain Driven Design), MVC-type architectures and SOLID principles, leading up to a pragmatic way of structuring and packaging software projects. Other advice from Sandro included modeling behavior, not state and not necessarily representing repositories as first-class citizens.

WebSocket for the Real-Time Web and the Internet of Things

By Peter Moskovits | Video | Slides

Not only was it an amazing presentation with live demos, Peter was also fully prepared with a backup plan for everything – including a PDF version of his presentation. After a historical perspective & technical explanation of how WebSockets work, he jumped into Kaazing demos which you can also experience online here. The most interesting was a kind of MVP for disseminating airline telemetry data (here).

Why Is An API Like a Puppy?

By Ade Oshineye | Video | Slides

RESTful APIs are not the solution to all of the world’s problems: Ade was short, succinct and insightful. The title of his talk reflected the fact that an API is an expensive long term commitment, it’s not just about the initial cost of software development. He got a lot of attention when he revealed that Google’s most successful API is AdWords, and it’s SOAP, not REST. Although REST is theoretically good, it doesn’t usually fit well with the real world consumer’s way of thinking. Another one of his gems was that if your [public] API is not being spammed/abused, then either no one is using it, or it’s happening and you’re not aware of it.

Implementing the Saga Pattern

By Caitie McCaffrey | Video | Slides

There wasn’t anything interesting to me during this time slot, so I decided to go with this one just for the Halo reference. There was just one picture of Halo. And a lot of “so” and “like”.

Techniques and Tools For a Coherent Discussion About Performance in Complex Architectures

By Theo Schlossnagle | Video | Slides

Theo decided it would be a good idea to plaster all his slides with huge pictures of steak. Anyway, after establishing that User Experience is measured in milliseconds, and that performance is also about the time spent between service layers, he covered distributed tracing systems such as Dapper and Zipkin.

IMG_3480

Great Engineering, Failed Product

By Marty Cagan | Video | Slides

Marty drew on decades of experience in Silicon Valley to summarize why great products and companies fail over and over again. I highly recommend watching his inspiring and insightful talk. Some of the things he touched upon while comparing successful and poorly performing teams:

  • Customers and company executives are a bad source of product ideas, because they don’t know what’s technically achievable
  • Developers are a good source, and so is Data (analytics, metrics, usage)
  • Multi-billion dollar projects are not based on a Business Case accurately predicting future revenue
  • Roadmaps are not a good indicator because Customers have other options available to them
  • Think Time to Money, not Time to Market – which means more than one iteration is involved
  • Product Managers are not mere [user] story writers – they need to have a deep understanding of the business, industry, customers and constraints
  • Most teams work in a way that gives them probably 20% of the benefit of Agile Methodologies
  • Value outcomes over output; think in terms of results, not projects
  • Successful teams run as many as 20 MVP experiments in a week – even if it involves hardware
  • Successful companies use an OKR approach to measure progress
  • The four product development questions:
    1. Will the customers choose it? (Customer Validation)
    2. Will they be able to use it? (User Experience)
    3. Can we build it? (Feasibility)
    4. Can our stakeholders support it? (e.g. Legality)

______________________________________________

Craft Conf 2015, Day 2

I had the privilege of attending the second year of CRAFT, a tech conference in Budapest focused on software craftsmanship. The last year (which was the first time it was held) had completely blown my mind. A year later I still keep referring back to the talks and haven’t finished fully absorbing them and putting all those inspiring ideas into practice.

IMG_3467

In short…

Craft Conf 2014 was better. The speakers came from a more diverse background, the talks spanned a multitude of unrelated topics and I remember it being very, very hard to choose from talks happening in parallel. Each minute spent there was a revelation.

This year, though, many of the talks seemed to be plug for a company or a product, in disguise. Certainly there were brilliant takeaways, but not at the same scale as the previous year.

In my opinion, 2014 was also held in a better venue, although the 2015 venue was outstanding too, as far as tech conference venues go. But the rooms were too far spread out (the map was inaccurate), the acoustics were bad everywhere except the Main Room and unlike 2014, the WiFi was not flawless. Lastly, there were far fewer food choices, longer queues, no bottled water (even for the speakers) and therefore a lot of glasses clanking.

On the positive side, the schedule was followed down to the minute, the live video streaming was smooth and considering the scale of the event (1300 attendees), everything was beautifully organized. I’m not complaining – it’s just that the first CRAFT had set a pretty high standard.

(Video and Slides links will be updated by next weekend, when they become available)

Agile Engineering in a Safety-Critical World

By Nancy Van Schooenderwoert | Video | Slides

“Instead of freezing the ocean, learn to ride the waves” – Nancy’s talk was mainly about how our need for predictability for effective coordination is at odds with our need for fast learning to handle unknowns. She pointed out that in the agile context, “Architecture is any design decision that you cannot easily change”.

There was the customary reference to WikiSpeed to dispel the myth that hardware changes can’t fit within 2-4 week iterations. And an interesting one to a paper called TIR45 from AAMI: Guidance on the use of AGILE practices in the development of medical device software.

Coding Culture

By Sven Peters | Video | Slides

Sven’s talk was both informative and inspiring. Some of the key takeaways:

  • Innovation needs time
  • Stop and celebrate wins, however small they may be
  • Balance your passion for code with your passion for customers
  • Turn your passion into product
  • Value trust, autonomy and transparency (Atlassian achieves this by using chat over other communication means)
  • Products come and go, culture stays

Take a look at Atlassian’s Mood App and Stash Reviewer Suggester.

Building Reliable Distributed Data Systems

By Jeremy Edberg | Video | Slides

This one was good, until we went deep diving into the NetFlix Simian Army, which was also good but could have been summarized in just one slide. One thing that stood out from Jeremy’s advice was to “build for three”, because if you can overcome problems there then the solution can be [more] easily scaled up to n.

Don’t forget to check out NetFlix Open Source Software Center.

Oh! You Pretty Tools

By Andrew Bayer | Video | Slides

Andrew gave an interesting talk about the role of internal tools and their developers in the organization, covering both the pros and the cons. For example while making the build or buy decision, consider the fact that people are more expensive than software. And some thoughtful insights, like how Integration Tests can double-up as the roadmap to your tool’s usage. He also revealed that Cloudera runs ~2000 Jenkins CI builds every day(!)

The rest of it was basically about, and lessons learned from, CloudCat.

Testing and Integration (The Remix)

By Ines Sombra | Video | Slides

Ines entertainingly summarized everything we know so far, and topped it off with new insights for a good measure.  She emphasized:

  • The importance of lightweight short-lived branches so that CI is not overlooked
  • The more likely a test is to fail, the sooner you should run it
  • The testing of provisioning systems, such as Chef Recipes, too
  • How test setup time and parallelization are the key factors in minimizing the testing cycle time

She recommended this talk about the Google Build System.

Her punchline was that CI is a predictor of professional maturity at the organizational and individual level, and she ended with a “rantifesto” about building a culture of quality.

Beyond Features: Rethinking Agile Planning and Tracking

By Dan North | Video | Slides

From Cutting to Curing: Dan presented the powerful and inspiring idea that maybe software engineering is more like surgery than the civil engineering principles that we currently use to manage it. Agile methodologies essentially optimize for predictability, and this not necessarily a good thing. He mused on how a 2-week sprint is just enough time for a mini-waterfall, and thus we are all basically whitewater rafting.

After reviewing where the Agile Manifesto has brought us, he set an ambitious new goal to sustainably minimize the lead time to business impact. 

He ended with:

  • The role of Features, Delivery and Kaizen
  • Schedule, Measure, Track, Showcase
  • How Value Stream Mapping can reveal surprises like typically a piece of work spends upto 90% of it’s time waiting for dependencies

How To Save Innovation From Itself

By Alf Rehn | Video | Slides

For me, Alf’s talk was the highlight of the event. It was so good and so inspiring that I won’t even summarize it here. Go watch it!

______________________________________________

The day ended with a party thrown by EPAM, which included free beer, a DJ-saxophone duo and a surprise flashmob.

You may also want to read my review of Day 3 of Craft Conf 2015.