Poojan (Wagh) Blog

Over at CNN: “Microsoft’s Zune HD to debut this fall” – SciTechBlog, John D. Sutter asks why anyone would chose the iPod Touch over the iPhone. I’ll tell you exactly why I bought my wife an iPod touch rather than an iPhone:

1. Monthly fee: The $70/month the AT&T bill for the iPhone is steep. It’d be worth it if she needed that connectivity…
2. Tethered mobility: … however, she doesn’t really want connectivity when she’s not around the house. She’s cool with checking email when she gets home.
3. I’ve heard the iPhone is great device, but not a great phone. Yeah: it’d be more convenient to have the all-in-one portable device platform and phone together. However, I’ve heard from numerous people (none of whom are allegiant to Motorola) that the iPhone isn’t terribly good as a phone. In truth, I never really found out why: call quality, user interface, etc. However, the suboptimality of the phone stuck in my head.
4. It pretty much runs everything the iPhone does: the iPod touch pretty much runs every app that the iPhone runs, so she’s really not giving up anything.

In fact, I wonder if people tend to by the iPhone because they don’t know how capable the iPod touch is.

[mp3 keywords=”Arcade Fire Wake Up” title=”Wake Up”]

… as featured in the trailers for Where the Wild Things Are.

I’ve heard more news of layoffs at Motorola (specifically, Motorola Labs—or what was left of it). These days, layoffs are nothing new. Pretty much every tech company seems to be on a layoff spree. In this post, I question whether the layoffs are a trend or an anomaly.

Caveats

To be clear, I am focusing on Motorola’s handset business. However, that seems to be what fuels Motorola’s rapid growth (when Motorola has it). I don’t worry about the public safety business. That business (as far as I know) has been on a steady growth trend for decades. One final caveat: I know absolutely nothing about stocks. This is not investment advice.

My mind goes back to the tech bust of 2001. Back then, people (at Motorola) said it was the worst they’ve ever seen it. I saw several people get laid off. Realize that this recession ocurred a little after I entered the workforce: it (partially) formed the basis of what I considered a normal market. I was in college during the go-go 90’s, where thousands of employers would show up on campus, looking to hire engineers. However, that was all I saw: I never really experienced any first-hand excess.

There were two points of view:

1. The tech market would return to “normal” and we’d get on with our engineering lives.
2. The tech market in the US was on a downward trend. Engineering careers would never return to what the used to be.

The optimistic view (#1) was confirmed in the interim period (2004-2007) when Motorola recovered. Motorola was buoyed by its success with the RAZR. Incidentally, this was when I returned to Motorola (2006). I didn’t have much of an opinion at the time. I thought it was good that Motorola came back with a hit. The question did come up about whether they’d need to do make a blockbuster every year, or if the market was just generally better and it didn’t matter. Honestly, I didn’t think much about it. I was just glad to be back.

Immediately after I returned, talk of downsizing returned. With our 2006 glasses, the 2001+ downturn was the anomaly. However, in 2008, it seemed to be the trend. In fact, the RAZR phenomenon of 2006 (then dubbed a trend) was now (in 2008) an anomaly.

I see an analogy with the US car industry: the large-car SUV craze now seems to be an anomaly. The trend now seems to be a decline in US car manufacturers.

So, where does that leave us today? I’d like to hear your comments: Is Motorola on a downward trend, interrupted by upward anomalies? Or is Motorola on an upward trend and two periods of this decade will be considered anomalies? Why?

I’m training not so much so that I can improve my run time, but to realize my intent in signing up for the race: to get in shape. I figure I need to do more to get in shape, and signing up for the race motivates me to run regularly.

For the past three weeks, I’ve run 3.5 4 miles every Monday, Wednesday,and Friday. I’ve heard that you have to excercise for a month before you can see results. Hopefully, I’ll keep it up for a week or two more.

Not sure if it was the right thing to do, but I ran this morning (Wednesday) and the race is tomorrow (Thursday) night. Hopefully, that gives my body enough time to recover.

I tend not to wear headphones while I run. I never thought about it before, but the quiet time is really nice. No, I’m not always looking around, absorbing the natural surrounding. In fact, I find myself thinking a lot. Which is good: I realized that I’m always listening to a podcast or something. I don’t give my brain enough time to just drift.

Update: I recovered my lost commit by following the directions here. In addition, I had to create a branch from this commit using chekcout -b. I then switch to the master branch and merged the temporary branch into master

It has been written posted that git revert is not the same as svn revert. That’s true.

However, there have been suggestions that the equivalent is git reset --hard commit. I just did this. It isn’t good. Luckily, I didn’t lose muchany data. However, doing a --hard means that you reset the index back in time, too–not just your working copy.

I’ll admit that I don’t understand git very well. I’m not entirely sure (now that I’ve gone back in time) how to bring myself back to the future.

Essentially git reset means that you want to get rid of changes in your repository: not merely go back in time, see what things looked like, and move forward in time.

Anyway, a safer thing (for me to have done) would be git checkout commit.

The git manual specifically says:

–hard

Matches the working tree and index to that of the tree being switched to. Any changes to tracked files in the working tree since commit are lost.

Wonder if I’m too feeble to be MacGyver and need a James Bond. On the other hand, now that I’ve learned this lesson, maybe I’m better off sticking here.

[mp3 keywords=”Metric Stadium Love” title=”Stadium Love”]
“No one is getting out”

A few weeks ago, I got to go to the David Allen Company’s “Mastering Workflow” Seminar. I’m glad I did. The seminar resolved several misconceptions I had about how GTD works, despite my owning Getting Things Done: The Art of Stress-Free Productivity in both text and audio form.

The seminar was lead by Chris McIntyre. He was an impressive presenter. I noticed that he immediately asked who had read the book and was implementing the system. He asked those who raised their hand what they liked about the system. Very smart: I’ve seen many a presentation get derailed by “experts” who want to either show their knowledge or derail the presenter. By identifying the “experts”, Chris recognized their expertise and brought them into the fold.

The seminar isolated several reasons why GTD wasn’t working as effectively for me as it could be:

• Processing: I (for some reason) didn’t get that one should process all inboxes once a day. I was tending to do it as part of the weekly review, which left me feeling very behind. I thought I was deviating from the system when I processed more often. In addition, since I wasn’t sure I was going to process daily, I tended to try to process things as they came—which disrupted my focus.
• Collecting: Ask, “Do I need more collection buckets or less?” I tried my best to have just one bucket. However, that’s a bit unreasonable. There’s an optimal value for each person (and it probably changes from month to month).
• Someday/Maybe: I never could figure out whether I should put more or fewer items on the S/M list (versus the next-action context lists). The answer: are you repelled by the number of actions on your next-action lists? If so, move some of them to the Someday/Maybe list.
• Multiple Someday/Maybe lists: There’s no reason to have one. If there’s a major project you want to do sometime in the future, you can have a separate list for that.
• Email: I try to follow the 3-folder arrangement (Inbox, Follow-Up, Archive). However, what I didn’t realize was that instead of processing things in my inbox, I was deferring them by putting them in the “Follow-Up” folder. When an action needs to be performed on an email, it should go in the Follow-Up folder, but the action needs to get recorded somewhere (@Email for example).
• Action Support: If something wasn’t in my inbox, it was either in trash or in a Reference file. I found myself creating new filing folders for even the smallest things. Instead, Chris recommends having an “Action Support” folder for active things. This really simplified my filing. I didn’t need to create a “tuition” file just so I can pay the tuition. Technically, my wife came up with this idea before I went to the seminar, but I didn’t listen.
• Ticklers: I could never figure out how to separate between a tickler file and a Someday/Maybe. Chris cleared up the confusion by pointing out that the Someday/Maybe list gets checked every week (during your weekly review), while the tickler gets checked on a specific day/month. I asked whether I could use a calendar for this purpose. The answer was yes, except that a tickler file is useful if you want the actual object (bill, concert tickets, etc.) to be the reminder.
• Managing No’s (Someday/Maybe): The Someday/Maybe list is a way of not making an agreement. Trick to managing your next-actions is to figure out how much you can do this week.

I had a few other random, non-actionable thoughts:

• Did David Allen come up with the runway, 10,000-foot, 50,000-foot model due to his consulting relationship with Lockheed-Martin? Perhaps it was the best metaphor for the clientele. Perhaps their nomenclature inspired him.
• Capture everything: I always thought GTD was compulsive in the habit of capturing everything even if it’s not important. However, I think the reason for this is that there are things that we just don’t want to do (we want to procrastinate) and leaving the decision of what to capture to your intuition can be dangerous. It’s better to retain everything and analyze it clearly.

The biggest thing I learned from the seminar was that I need to experiment more. I had taken the GTD methodology to be a mandate. However, during the seminar, Chris McIntyre makes it clear that the GTD recommendations are merely practices that have been found to be effective. I’ve found that my ideal GTD system as the following traits (personal preferences):

• Very little setup: things such as contexts, etc., should not require setup. I should be able to add/remove contexts on demand.
• Printing: I find it hard to organize work (that’s usually on a computer) with a computer. It’s nice to have a printed checklist.
• Computer automation: I find it tedious to do things (such as match a project with an action) that can be automated.
• Paper capture: …however, I can draw diagrams and capture information much easier on paper.

GTD isn’t for everyone, but I’m getting much more value out of it now that I understand it better. Before, it seemed overly complicated. Now it seems a simpler and effective.

In a future post, I’ll describe the GTD system that I’m using now.

[mp3 keywords=”David Garza Black Music” title=”Black Music”]
Really like the pause between the “she likes that…” and “…black music.”

Originally, I thought this song was about Menachem Begin.

[mp3 keywords=”Mountain Goats Sept 15th 1983″ title=”Sept 15th 1983″]

I later found out that it describes an tragic, unjust scene and the song became closer and more haunting.

This last week, I took a GTD training seminar (led by Chris McIntyre). I thoroughly enjoyed it and decided to get back on the wagon. I’ve come up with a system that works for me (so far), but I decided I should post a review of some things that didn’t work.

I started picking up GTD in October of 2006. I decided I wanted work to just be easier. I had recently moved from Freescale to Motorola, which made my commute and therefore my work day much simpler. I wanted more of the same big gains and isolated GTD as a way of making my work-life easier.

I used a Windows Weekly coupon (from twit.tv) to get an audible free download and downloaded the audiobook. I tried to jump in it, surveying as much software as possible. I later bought the book.

I eventually gave up around November of 2009, when I moved from Motorola to Infinium.

Here are a list of approaches I tried:

1. Thinking Rock
2. Chandler
3. TiddlyWiki (MonkeyGTD and d-cubed)
4. Rainlendar
5. 2-subject notebook
6. 3×5-card based system

Thinking Rock

I picked up thinking rock because it was described as closely following the GTD methodology. The program itself includes the GTD processing diagram.

The problem was that it was slow—both in terms of the actual application performance, but more importantly, I found that there were just so many fields to populate and task/project entry was therefore difficult.

Chandler

I got on the Chandler bandwagon pretty early. It’s main attractive feature was the ability to sync between a server (Chandler hub), WebDAV, and email. I liked its ability to “tag” rather than categorize (Chandler collections are essentially tags). However, I often found myself without a computer (especially at home) and therefore without

MonkeyGTD

Out of the computer-based approaches, I probably liked MonkeyGTD the best (tied with Rainlendar). This was an earlier version of MonkeyGTD. Entry was easy. I even created an AutoHotkey script that would add items to the MonkeyGTD file. I was also able to embed my Google calendar right in MonkeyGTD. The print facility (and ability to customize it using CSS) was also very nice.

I eventually stopped using MonkeyGTD when I was put on an important deadline. I decided I needed something that handled both tasks and calendaring in one application.

Rainlendar

I then went to Rainlendar. Rainlendar is essentially a calendaring application, but it has some unique and powerful features. Most notably, it allows URL links in tasks and events. (More on this later) It handles tasks very well. It doesn’t natively include GTD identifiers such as project, context, etc. However, they translate very easily to Rainlendar (or any iCal-based application) as category and location. It’s highly customizable in its presentation. In addition, it has a fairly good print facility.

I ended up writing a small Python program to parse the iCal file used by Rainlendar and spit out a task list, by context (location). This allowed me to take things on the go.

I was using Rainlendar with WikidPad. Rainlendar would handle all my GTD stuff and WikidPad would hold reference information and logs. (I did try WikidPad for GTD, but I found it clunky at the time—and it didn’t include a true calendar.)

One of the things I liked the best about Rainlendar was the fact that one could enter locations (“contexts”) on the fly. In most other systems, you have to set up a fixed number of contexts (@Home, @Office, @Errand, @Call). The thing I learned from adopting this system was that contexts should be able to change on the fly. If I want to create a context for drinks with my friends, I should be able to type in @Beer at any time. (Okay, I’d be more likely to put @Cider).

2-Subject Notebook

I finally decided that all the time I spent tweaking computer-based GTD applications and researching others wasn’t worth it. I found that a computer-based GTD system was more distractive: every time I sat down at the computer to review my list, I would end up doing something else on the computer.

So, I decided I needed to go back to basics and implement the GTD system in a paper-based form. I’ll confessed: I actually used 2 sections of a 3-subject notebook. The first section would handle “projects” (a GTD term I still don’t like). The second section would handle “next actions” (another GTD term that I like). The second section is divided up into “contexts” (a GTD term that I’m fine with) with a context per page.

I numbered each item in each section. So, each project gets a number and each task gets a number. The numbering format is <pagenumber>.<projectnumber>. So, for example, on page 1 of the “project” section, I might have:

1.1 Personal Blog => 1.1
1.2 Front Lawn => 2.1

Page 1 of the “context” section might have:

@Online

1.1 Compare blogging providers for personal blog (1.1)

Page 2 of the “context” section might have:

@Errand

2.1 Buy grass seed and starter fertilizer (1.2)

So, by placing numbers next to each project, I keep track of the next action for each project. Similarly, next to each task, there’s a reference back to the project.

My weekly review involved going through the project list and seeing if the task was done. If it was, I needed to come up with a new task (or cross out the project itself). I decided that even single-action open-loops would get a project. (I tended to flip-flop on whether this was a good thing or not—and still don’t know.)

The main problem with this system was that weekly reviews were tough. I’d constantly be flipping between the two sections of the notebook. It got very tedious.

3×5-card based system

I next decided that carrying the 2-subject notebook around was too difficult. I decided that I should use 3×5 cards to hold project and task information. (I was using a hipster PDA for capture for a while.)

I formatted the cards as follows:

• Each project would get a card. The project name would be written at the top.
• Each task would get a line on the card.
• I bought a set of plastic 3×5 folders from Levenger, and assigned a context to each folder.

So, for example, my “Front Lawn” project would have its own 3×5 card with the task “Buy grass seed and starter fertilizer”. I’d therefore put it in the @Errands folder. (In truth, I don’t write the “@” on my folders; that’s just for your benefit, since everyone else that does GTD seems to have it.) As soon as I had the grass seed, (possibly at my next weekly review) I’d cross out that task (or check it off) and then write the next action: “mow front lawn”. The whole 3×5 card would then go into the @Home (or @Yard) folder.

I really don’t know why this system didn’t work. It was likely just the effort I put into it. I got lazy. Its main deficiency was that I had to have the right folders at the right time. I would then have to amass all the folders for a weekly review. That’s not hard to do. In truth, I just got lazy.

PostScript

I recently attended a GTD seminar. I now have more zeal for adopting it. In the next instalment (or maybe the one after), I’ll post what’s I’m trying next: a text-file GTD system.