Entries tagged with ria - MIX Online

Microsoft putting the I in Rich International Applications. Go RIA France!

Mossyblog — Wed, 23 Apr 2008 06:58:00 GMT

You see a lot about RIA online these days, even debates on the 3 letters, but Christophe Lauer has taken the initiative one step further and produced a RIA focused blog but in French (http://www.riactu.fr)

I have absolutely no clue what the heck he's saying in his blog posts as I'm limited to a mutated version of English we Aussies prefer to call "slang" but that being said, it's great to see RIA as a concept being translated and discussed by the French in French.

Those crazy french, what will they think of next.

Love your work Christophe!

P.S

The title translates to:
Microsoft met le I dans Rich International Applications. Allez RIA France!

More Info: http://www.riactu.fr

RIA is slowly fading in terms of it's definition.

Mossyblog — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 11:25:00 GMT

When I first started the RIA Evangelism role in Microsoft, I had this nagging feeling that the term RIA was just all over the place. Depending on which technology you are backing and which stream of alliance you uphold, the truth is the term was destined to be abused before it really took off.

I even tried to provoke conversation around it, by waving a big red flag and saying "Microsoft is about to use Rich Interactive not Rich Internet Application, debate me on it". Oh they debated me on it and lots of it, as the end conclusion was simply folks didn't care what the definition was, so long as we all understood Macromedia owned it in 2002. Such logic baffles me to this day.

I started to see some Adobe Staffers in many respects abuse the very term they acquired, by mixing the pool with Rich Branded Experiences against RIA, and if it had Flash - well it was RIA. I challenged many of them on that, and the result ended in personal character warfare.

After all these blog battles, arguments, debates and so on, the term is becoming lost in the struggle over which technology is better than the other. The true essence of what I thought RIA stood for has now become a buzz word, much like the "Web 2.0" or "Social Networking". That's sad, not because I am attached to the term, but simply because it's a much easier way for customers to frame the conversation with other customers, and not have to spend time educating them.

Ryan Stewart, has recently tried his best to define the term RIA, but has failed. It's not that Ryan doesn't get it, but simply - who is he to define the term? (In that it's not about Ryan, but who is he to define it? debate that first and then follow up with a merit debate on the semantics of the term).

Some folks loyal to the Adobe cause will support him, others whom aren't will argue the point with him (have already). In the end, the term is now up for debate, with no single winner or owner but simply open for mob rule.

The team with the biggest horde will own the definition - for a while, that is until someone or something with large amount of credibility and marketing power will change the landscape once again.

Can you sit here and honestly blame Microsoft in many respects for leaning more towards the term Rich Client Platform vs RIA, sure it doesn't start the conversation with the right framing - as most regard RIA has holy and all that is good ( DO NOT TOUCH stickers are ready to put around it's term). Yet, Rich Client Platform is simply a way for us internally to define what it is we are setting out to do. To build a Rich Client Platform.

Welcome to the Internet, where a terms definitions is as good as those who lobby for it inside wikipedia. Mob rules.

What resolution do you design RIA in?

Mossyblog — Mon, 28 Jan 2008 01:20:00 GMT

I read an interesting post this morning on how the author wanted folks to consider the 800px resolution for their designs. He cites that although he has a large resolution, it doesn't mean that he's not also using other applications at the same time.

...But with 1900+ pixels, I keep half for the browser and half for other stuff. If you go with 1000+ pixels, it doesn't leave me with enough room for my other apps, and I've got to (ack!) scroll sideways. It's not as bad with the ball on the Mighty Mouse, but most people don't have one and it's not exactly effortless even with one... - Sammy Larbi

It's an interesting point to debate, as whilst on one hand I do agree with him that the potential for your audience to overlay multiple smaller applications is there, yet at the same time the benefits of expanding your resolution to accommodate more on screen can also be in an asset.

Screen real estate is a hard subject to nail as even if you're the best information architect in the world, you will still annoy someone with your chosen path. The trick is to figure out you collateral damage, in that what percentage of your user base is going to disagree with your design.

The easiest way to work that out is to do some basic research, check the statistics of your existing site (assuming you had one already) then ask them but do so in a way that doesn't draw attention to your intent - as humans are funny at times, they do one thing but say another.

eg:

Q. Do you think Coke is good for your diet...
A. Yes, it's terrible...

The intent was it's terrible, bad, negative, stop!. Yet they will drink coke.

Here is a tip, we are habitual creatures and if you can compliment our patterns of habit, you're likely to become less annoying.

Take this blog for example. Below is a graph indicating my resolution stats for this blog.

Would it be a good idea for me to go back to 800x600 resolution? If not what would you consider my ideal resolution.

Know your audiences technology limitations, know your customers habits and above all plot your approaches into a Risk Matrix.

A Flash Guru Talks about Silverlight

allenjs — Tue, 15 Jan 2008 20:17:00 GMT

Jesse Warden (dot Kizz-ohm) was recently in town to meet with Bill Gates and the Silverlight team. Jesse is well-known for helping people fuse hardcore coding and Flash design. Between the lively and top-secret internal meetings, Nishant grabbed a camera and asked Jesse to share some of his thoughts with us. You'll hear his thoughts about where the industry is headed, as well as some unedited and frank feedback about where the industry players are doing well and not so well.

Interview: Cynergy Systems' Dave Wolf

Mossyblog — Wed, 09 Jan 2008 01:31:00 GMT

When you first type in http://labs.cynergysystems.com you are presented with a matrix style decision. On the left you have the red pill whilst on the right you have the blue pill. This one screen summarises Cynergy Systems really well, as it shows this is a true agnostic company willing to place bets on both sides.

In light of this, I decided it was high time I had a "sit down' with Dave Wolf, Cynergy's VP of Consulting.

Scott: Who are you, and what is it you do?

Dave: Cynergy is an RIA design and development firm. We build RIA software solutions for software companies and lines of businesses worldwide. We’re really one of the few companies around that built themselves from the ground up to design and build these kinds of software experiences. We have not only user experience development, but also back-end enterprise services development and our own design agency so we can really offer a pretty holistic approach to folks. Sometimes people look to us for just UX design, but often times customers outsource whole projects, so we end up being the entire software engineering team.

Scott: Cynergy are quite an agnostic company whom have perfected the art of using both Adobe and Microsoft technology, why?

Dave: We’ve always been focused on RIA development. That has meant a lot of things over the years but really historically our biggest practice had been around the Adobe stack. We’ve been talking about RIA and what actually became Silverlight for quite some time with Microsoft and when Silverlight 1.0 launched at MIX07 we were the first RIA firm to announce we were putting together a Silverlight practice ourselves. Our passion really has been building RIAs and picking out the technologies we think solve the real challenges around building these kinds of apps It has to be rich and engaging, have a really strong designer to developer workflow, and be a seriously productive development environment. Silverlight gave us all of that, but more importantly Silverlight brings along the whole .NET community which meant this incredible pool of talent that understands not only the technology, but they understand building serious enterprise class software. To us this is about solving customers problems, and doing that by tapping the right technology, rather than the one technology.

Scott: You’ve started to make movements in the labs space for Cynergy Developers, why and what is your biggest hope around this space?

Dave: Cynergy Labs is really exciting for us. One thing we’ve always felt really strong about here at Cynergy is that being a leader is about a lot more than just being big. It’s about providing real leadership and investing back into the community. RIAs have really created a world where if we can imagine it we can build it. Where software doesn’t have to be the same grey background and button bar at the top and where the data grid isn’t the only way to see and understand data. Frankly the only limit really is imagination and experience, and so we stepped back and said, “how can we foster imagination and build up real world experience?” and that brought Labs to life. A place where Cynergy folks can put forward ideas that we think provide a real contribution to our customers and the community at large, and we can provide both the place and the funding to make it happen. We also know we have a huge amount of experience in the whole RIA project lifecycle and we decided rather than say carve out some percentage of everyone’s time towards research, lets create Labs in a way where we could take these amazing ideas and build them out just like we’d build out any projects, with dedicated teams using our LookFirst user-centric development process.

Scott: Maestro is taking RIA to the device discussion. What motivated this?

Dave: The device is the next step in this whole user-centric experience revolution. The first steps were to focus on the presentation of the experience. In realizing that just because the data is stored in rows and columns doesn’t mean we have to present it to people in rows and columns. We can create visualizations that present data and information to people in such a way they can really understand it immediately. One powerful way to do that is to present information through broad strokes of reality. To present information in a way we might see it and interact with it in our physical environment, where in a “blink” you can see and understand it. But the next step is in how users interact with that data. That’s where the hardware comes in. The mouse’s addition to our interaction hardware revolutionized the PC by creating a more natural real world productive for users to interact with their software. That is what brought about Project Maestro. Can we now explore new hardware interaction devices that bring in these same broad strokes of reality we can combine with rich experiences.

Scott: When I last spoke to you, you said

“..If you thought RIA was a fad, just look at the hardware guys. Frankly they have proven to predict the future for generations.”

Could you expand on this?

Dave: There’s been a lot of pundits making noise that there is no need for RIAs and they are a fad. We have everything we need in HTML, CSS and the browser. I would counter that if you believe RIA is a fad, look around at the hardware guys who are right now building hardware meant to run RIAs. Whether it is the Microsoft Surface on one extreme, or the iPod on the other, or things like the Compaq touch screen PC’s right in the middle of the ramp, the hardware vendors are building RIA devices. Hardware is a harbinger of what’s going to stick because of the very high capital expenses around designing and deploying hardware especially compared to software. So seeing all of this investment by the hardware vendors is a huge sign that not only do they believe RIAs are real, they’re heavily invested enough to make sure they stay that way. This leads right into having Maestro be the first project made public out of labs. We think the combination of RIA and Hardware is where things are going next.

Scott: I blogged recently about RIA on Devices, what’s your thoughts on should we evolve the concept onto a device or not?

Dave: As I was saying before, there are two sides to enterprise software. There is displaying data and there is interacting with data. WPF and Silverlight and other RIA technologies are providing us with the canvas to solve the first problem of how do we present data. Although interactive design and development is a part of the data manipulation challenge, hardware is going to play a huge role moving forward. Bringing these tailored RIA experiences together with tailed interactive hardware we think is going to be really exciting. The question is what is the right form factor, and that’s what Project Maestro coming out of Labs was about. Let’s invest into research into this exact question.

Scott: What’s the biggest stumbling block for RIA today?

Dave: It’s really two things. People and Process. The people challenge is both having enough people, and the right kinds of people. RIA development can be more complicated because it takes all kinds of roles. It’s not just a developer for the front end, but a back-end services developer and a designer. One of the reasons folks choose us is that we have all of those folks and can put a total development team together made up of all of the right people. The challenge though is that when you have all of these people trying to work together, you need a really good process to keep them moving forward and working as a real team. This is why you hear so much about the “developer to designer workflow.’ Tools like Expression and Blend help a ton by having been built to work within these workflows, but you have to have the process down and your people indoctrinated into it. We’ve worked really hard for years to get our LookFirst process down and it’s incredible the difference it makes. We’re knocking out these incredible apps in a fraction of the time it used to take us to develop even primitive web apps.

Scott: What inspires your team to do stuff like Maestro or adopt WPF/Silverlight before it’s even released?

Dave: Passion! Our people are so passionate about the whole RIA space. A lot of this comes from seeing what’s possible with things like WPF and Silverlight. Once you see what some of these apps can be like, it’s hard not to be excited. We’ve designed and developed over 60 RIAs and everyone feels more innovative then the last. It makes you realize we’ve only scratched the surface of the kinds of visualizations and interactions we’re going to see, and that makes these Labs projects all the more exciting.

Scott: What is Microsoft doing right in the RIA space? – feel free to elaborate on what we are doing wrong as well.

Dave: Microsoft is doing a lot right. First off they really get the designer to developer workflow idea and have been working hard to get it folded into the stack in places like Expression and Blend. Secondly they also really get that this needs to be about building a real community inside the vast .NET development community. These projects take lots of people all interacting and collaborating. That means building out communities and putting collaboration tools out there to make this all fundamentally easier.

Scott: You’ve opened up more branches around the world, is RIA really paying that well? How is big business embracing RIA?

Dave: It really is. We’re privately held, profitable and expanding at hundreds of percent growth. We have been opening offices all over and we do that by finding great talent and putting walls around them. We reached the coolest milestone the other day. With the announcement of London the sun never sets on Cynergy <wink>. What has been honestly the most surprising to me has been the amount of traction from big business. It’s not just the start-ups and bleeding edge types. Its Banks and Manufacturers and Fortune 50 software companies that are really engaging with RIAs. You combine that sign with the hardware vendors and our growth and it paints a pretty incredible picture.

Scott: In a Sydney bar we had blast telling people Carson is really Damian Lewis, How many times since you have done that?

Dave: Actually we only chose Damian Lewis because we were in Oz. Usually we go with the more rare but more popular Anthony Michael Hall move.

or or

Carson is the one on the left, President of Cynergy Systems. I also would like to note that Anthony Michael Hall once played Bill Gates.. so Carson and opening up companies around the world? hmmm...

Cynergy Systems have also just recently opened offices in both Sydney & London. This is definitely a company to keep an eye on as we move forward in the RIA space.

2008 Prediction: The year of the RIA Device Discussion.

Mossyblog — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 06:59:00 GMT

Like most technology bloggers today, I also will take a stab at a prediction for 2008. The prediction is simple; this will be the year that we engage in discussion around devices and RIA.

State of Play

Devices are getting smarter, more usable and most important of all – cheap. If you are like me, you may have a lot of devices attached to your name lying around the house or work. I myself have 2x XBOX 360’s, 1x XBOX Original, 1x iPod Touch, 1x Zune, 1x iPod Nano, Samsung BlackJack and well heaps more.

I’m what many would call an “Enthusiast” when it comes to device ownership. Yet what does a lot of these have in common? They are essentially connected. The problem however is that they each require unique approaches to developing against and this is bad form and in my opinion, now becomes prime candidate for the RIA discussion to take place.

RIA is still at its infancy. It’s still heavily focused today in what it can do on the desktop but when you look at the context of what RIA hints at, it's really about delivering rich connected experiences within a sandbox existence.

The problem I foresee with RIA is it keeps getting pushed into inheriting desktop models, thus the sandbox boundaries start to be probed. It’s the wrong discussion, the right discussion is how to agree on a sandbox and then deploy the agreed sandbox to multiple devices. As this in turn can provide a prescribed format in which developer(s) can build once and then deliver to one or more surfaces.

This isn’t happening – Yet..

In 2007, Potential was on the horizon

Adobe and Apple are two power brands that are rumoured to get married soon. The rumours state that iPod Touch / iPhone and Flash Runtime are expected to be joined at the hip via some partnership of some kind between the two brands. The initial problem with this theory is that Apple and Adobe will have to agree on the terms of competition centred on QuickTime delivery vs. Flash delivery not to mention tooling such as Final Cut Pro vs. Adobe Premier.

It won't stop there either, Adobe AIR could also potentially hurt Apple with its Safari compete as what AIR really hints at is “please park me on a device” given its unique sandbox positioning. Thus the waters can be considered murky if the partnership were to go ahead.

However, let's assume Apple and Adobe was to become partners. This could now become a very interesting conversation to have as now the RIA debate gets hotter and stakes in the game get higher and harder. The state of play may very well change - not to mention the ripple effects associated with Apple/Adobe RIA's of tomorrow. As they now become a portable and desktop experience with a one-to-many build and delivery workflow.

Where does this leave Microsoft? I have no doubt we’d deliver a proportional response to this hypothetical should it arise (we essentially have strong movement in this space today), but the point is that it’s an attractive value proposition to consider - even for a brief moment – thus I’d encourage you to Start the conversation now while the overall RIA landscape is in its infancy.

The first part of the RIA on device discussion starts with UX Platform.

The overarching piece to the RIA conversation is UX Platform. It comprises of not just development environments (tools, workflow etc) but also client surfaces likely to be reached. It won’t stop there, the respective brands that play a role will also need to bid, broker, barter whatever it takes to get their nominated technology onto such devices - thus it requires an early bond with strong partners. The flip side to this is that there will also need to be an attractive developer base behind it – as no developers means limited solution delivery.

I firmly believe that Microsoft has the correct ingredients going forward, it’s relatively early days but the device discussion can still be influenced. The mood is right and this year is a great time to think beyond the browser and consider how our UX Platform fits in with tomorrow’s markets.

Going forward, three things are clear:

Brands like Microsoft, Apple, Adobe, Google, Mozilla etc all have strong stakes in this game.
Audio/Video is the first hunting grounds (market channel), as its got enormous amounts of eyeballs whom are found UX wanting.
Developer & Designer workflow are at both a complex and yet fragile state one wrong move by the above brands and it could hurt significantly.

What’s not clear is who is likely to get 2/3 market share around devices with their nominated RIA solution (of course I’d say Microsoft has potential etc but I’m biased). This is where the next frontier will be and I predict 2008 is the year in which the discussion is going to be had.

I state this as it in 2007 we saw iPod Touch / iPhone and the first thoughts around that centered on how Social Network phenomenon like Twitter, Facebook and Flickr could get a piece of that action.

In short, RIA’s begging to be built, but with no SDK to match the proposed demand.

You're a RIA Architect, I want to hear you say it..

Mossyblog — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 02:14:00 GMT

I was asked via Steam Chat today from a close friend of mine "Where can I get some decent RIA work.." to which I had a fumbled reply (weakness here for our RIA community). It was a great question and something I've often thought about in terms of how our RIA communities from both Adobe and Microsoft work (another post).

Later that chat..

We got onto talking, and I should clarify that Grae is quite an exceptionally talented RIA Producer. He can both code and design with the best of them and I wish I could clone 50 more of him.

The biggest problem Grae faced was how to position himself that reflected on his capabilities and passion. His talent is never questioned, his approach is. In that he'll do what I used to do, join a team, begin building a product/solution and somewhere along the line hit a point of frustration. Then one starts to consider exit strategies.

The real problem for Grae is that he's taken roles that are either designer or developer, never really in the middle. To not only emphasis his pain points, he's also one of the guys in the team that can see all the angles from end to end thus frustration creeps in.

As he can see weak points in the code or design starting to arise and he wants to fix them, in fact he knows how to fix them but can't quite get the message across. As the moment he does, folks feel he's encroaching on their patch and can at times get defensive.

Here is where we need to all say this out loud. Grae, you're a RIA Architect.

The downside for folks like Grae is that software teams aren't acknowledging this position as well as they should. The ones that do, I feel are the ones whom are capable of shipping tomorrow.

I think it's high time we acknowledge this out loud and proud as you can spot the good RIA Architects of today. Just look at their resume and see the patterns that emerge. Usually they flip flop between design and developer and don't spend large periods of time in the one position.

Do not punish them for this, in fact pounce on them and give them a role that is in the form of software leadership, as trust me you will thank me for it in the long run.

Here's what Grae stated after I made him say "I'm a RIA Architect" out loud and proud:

seven: it wasn't until you said it then
seven: and I said it back
seven: that I realised actively what the source of my frustration was
seven: taking positions where I couldn't enact required change
seven: because no matter how high my role in the creative realm
seven: I didn't have enough authority
seven: to kick the asses of producers and tech
seven: and profitable RIA/Interactive requires a solid blend of creative, production and tech
seven: and works under an EP to deal with producers

If anyone needs a quality RIA Architect, give Grae a call/email.
grae.hall@gmail.com

Putting the Rich in RIA : User Account Profiles.

Mossyblog — Sun, 02 Dec 2007 06:08:00 GMT

A User Account Today.

Typically when you set out to build a RIA, you look at what data you're about to keep about a persons account. In that obviously "Username, Password and Email" are three key pieces of information you need to begin. The rest is the other metadata associated to an account, and in CRM's you'd go deeper in terms of phone numbers etc.

The data is up to you and I'd never dictate what you should and shouldn't capture. What I am focused on is how you present that data, in that how "Rich" do you want the experience to be in terms of presenting what is probably the most boring data in a RIA.

I'd wager majority use Tabs + Forms and basically categories this into neat portions that are close to being semantically correct (in terms of which heading they fall under - look into information architecture).

Context is what though?

What's the context of having a person(s) username & password in a form along side their other information? Isn't this more of a security thing vs a personal bio? What if you're profiling your accounts based on experience they've had with you as well? where do you put that data?

Point is, suddenly your tabbed approach starts to get bogged down and the next thing you know it, you're facing a comprehensive set of tabs (stacked ontop of one another most likely) and the form probably grows in metrics - width/height to accommodate).

Let's put the Rich back into RIA.

Well, I'd now argue that if you're using some of the new RIA technologies, why the heck are you using Tabs? In that, you've got the ability to go beyond a form now, in that the technology is a blank canvas and the experience is up to your imagination (alongside some basic Usability Principals).

That's the key, why have a form (which after traversing through a grid), presents you with more then you bargained for. Why drop the experience there, why not approach it differently - radically if you will.

Step away from the Tabs as you know it..

In the below example I did something trivial, I took all these pieces of a users profile and applied them in a format that is well similar to a Mobile Phone.

The reason I did this is what's the best device on the planet at the moment that has almost figured out how to cram a lot of data into a small portion (screen). In that assign "icons" to represent what the tabs would typically do, but also do so that it's broken into piece meal format(s). Let the user then decide which part of a users detail they want to drill into.

That's all well in good, but where is the Form?

So once the "Profile PDA" (if you will) has been conjured up, how does the end user get into the form?

Well, this is where your imagination needs to do it's job. In that take the above example, it states that I've selected the "User Profile" card, which in this case means "this is the users contact profile" so the form could then spring out (overlay the top of grid style layout) and present the persons details in a similar looking "Contact Card". (Sorry still working on the artwork for that).

Point is, you've just isolated the overall account metadata into one small piece, once clicked it expands into a richer experience (I assume your next step will be rich!). The experience is the motivator here, in that let's make this form almost feel like some GUI found within games, like you've hacked into some year 2055 future looking CRM - have fun with the data but be serious with it, as it's business still.

What are your users thinking?

I hinted in an article before that when you build your RIA's you should think about monitoring the users interaction with it. In that in the above GUI you will note a "smiley speech bubble icon". This is basically an idea whereby when a user logs into the system, they not only get asked their Username & Password but also "how you feeling right now?".

Based on their answer, the Profile PDA adjusts it's UI to suite. This will then empower the owner of the RIA system to get an understanding of the emotional state of their users (why isn't important, it serves this example so stop asking questions).

let's assume when I logged in today, I nominated my emotion as angry. This then updates a row in a database (simple flag) and the UI reacts to my emotional state (in that what if the outer GUI would reflect on colours that would help cheer me up or does something that makes me laugh? - maybe a joke in a newsticker or a funny youtube overlay).

Emotions are for weaklings, I love Vista how does this matter?

Well, as you'll note in the Profile PDA next to the "Scott Barnes" part, there is also a "Vista Zealot" icon (I got these from an icon set called "Forum Faces"). In my RIA I'm curious to know what type of breed my profiles are? in that what do their peers think of them and again, can the User Interface react to suite this (advertising could suite more towards Vista compatible software instead of BeOS hehe). If the account in question was a Mac fanboi etc you could also insert an icon that represents this.. etc etc..

Conclusion.

The objective of this post was to trigger thought, in that you are armed with some of the greatest, most agile and excited technology to build with and the first thing we typically see in most RIA's is a typical "form" mentality and I often ponder on this. I can see it's easier to ship, and well I don't fault that at all. It just irritates me the most though, as I think user experience isn't just about pre-defined design patterns, it has more potential and the objective I'd like to see tomorrow's RIA have is that they react to context.

I want software to react to me for a change, I want to be able to punish and reward my software and lastly I want it to be something that can adjust my mood and that of the work force.

Software isn't just about balancing general ledgers, it can also be about fun and just because you're building a complex financial system doesn't mean it also can't be fun at the same time.

Think about it, why does the Friday emails get sent around in email about some funny random act that happened around the world. It helps break the day up a little and that's my hope for RIA.

Q.What's that RIA you're building Scott?

I've got this idea for a RIA Platform, it's something I've been very slowly chipping away at for the past 2 years. It's being built in Microsoft technology (was built in Adobe Flex), and I'll expand more another day, as I'm not ready to talk about it just yet (it's my personal project that I hope to release before I grow old and retire heh).

(I'm also thinking of ways to one day pitch it internally to become a Microsoft Product.. i have but a dream..)

RIA can be a business game!

Mossyblog — Fri, 30 Nov 2007 02:40:00 GMT

Gaming companies have a tougher hurdle to beat then most line of business application (LOB) vendors, as you see gaming is something you do when you're not in front of the LOB applications or when not at school.

As a result, you can't let things slide. You're audience are less forgiving and demand near perfection, and when it doesn't happen it can either make or break you in a heart beat. The main reason is, that mainstream press are constantly hovering over most of the game studios, waiting for them to trip up and provide them a scoop on some small amount of detail, which has enough to draw their readers attentions (given Gaming Magazines / Sites are a dime a dozen).

Games are not only judged by their covers, but also their actual functionality and more importantly the user experience. Talk about the toughest critics, if a 12 year old cannot figure out how to make their City (SimCity) run in an economic environment that has huge amounts of hurdles before them, damned if they will praise it or talk about it front of their friends. If that same 12 year old can't figure out how to complete a Quest due to poor visuals (early days of World of Warcraft), they will not only talk about it, but it will be so damn loud that others will help carry that voice forward.

Yes, Gaming companies have the toughest hurdle excluding Operating System makers (Microsoft gets an absolute beating at times on everything). Yet, Software applications get rated in a fashion that's more moderated. Did this application fit my business requirements, yes/no/partially.

Rich Internet Applications are now being thrust into the void between gaming and line of business, they are asked to mimic all the great elements of gaming experiences but also have the serious component required for lines of business. In this context, despite the attraction to this line of thinking, they are ultimately doomed as there is no guide post for this type of success.

This has increased the variables beyond the reach of mere mortals at present, whilst the technology is here today and is getting closer with each iteration, it however needs to overcome one undiscovered variable - humans. Humans are a funny thing, we love patterns but can't explain them, if you were to ask the above 12 year old or others like him "Which game do you love the most, and why" I guarantee you will get a variety of answers in response (if you don't, startup a game studio now as you have the market cornered).

I think the key ingredient in all great software in both gaming and line of business, is context. It has to be context driven to a persons persona, the user interface needs to react in a way that keeps the end users pain points in perspective. I wasn't kidding around when I suggested that "XBOX Achievement Points" should be built into all mainstream software at Microsoft, as it would encourage the users to gain more awareness of how the software they have bought works, furthermore it rewards them for both their failures and successes and lastly, it provides them a clear benchmark on how they are doing.

I hate doing my expense reports here at Microsoft, simply because it's primative that it's almost bordering on embarassing. Ask any employee at Microsoft, they will gripe and moan about it. Yet, I wonder if we were to make this into some game, in which we compete in some way and at the same time get rewarded.

"Scott, congratulations, you've just completed your 50th Expense Report, and you win a prize from the company store".

It doesn't take much, just some imagination mixed with Microsoft UX Platform and you stand a far better chance of reaching employee satisifcation for mundane task through simple User Experience that differs from "Serious" software (yet the data layer beneath the UI doesn't alter). Games aren't forced into consumers hands, they are wanted. Business applications are mostly forced into the workforces hands, how about we make them want it as well?

I am Scott Barnes, and I love my RIA.