Posts Tagged ‘Sage’
In a few previous blog posts I’ve been talking about attracting new employees whether through office design, advice for someone starting their career or corporate mobility. In this article I’ll be looking at some ideas on how to keep existing employees. Generally the value of a high tech company largely depends on the IP contained in the heads of the employees and growth prospects depend on their ability to execute.
High Costs of Hiring and Training New People
Hiring new employees is quite time consuming and a slow process. Especially in todays job market which is very hot with all the venture capital that is freely flowing right now. Is this a bubble that will shortly burst? Either way hiring is fairly slow right now. Then any new employee has to take quite a bit of time to learn your ways of doing things and to become familiar with your existing programs and systems.
On the converse new employees do being new ideas, new experiences and new perspectives that greatly help an organization. Having a stream of new employees is very beneficial, but when it becomes a torrent then things get tricky.
To retain employees, it isn’t just a matter of higher salaries (though that works well for me), but understanding people’s motivations which may not be intuitive. A good video on people’s motivations is this one. Motivations are really quite complex and much more is involved than just money. This video’s thesis is that you need to pay enough money to take money off the table as an issue, then the priorities become:
Autonomy: people want to be self-directed, they want control over what they do. This is one of the reasons that unstructured time is so successful at so many organizations.
Mastery: people want to have mastery at what they are doing. They need time to learn and practice what they are doing in order to raise their work to a higher level. Often in technical organizations, this is why frequently moving people between projects causes so much dissonance. People aren’t just cogs that do repetitive work that are all interchangeable. This is often confused with resistance to change which is something quite different.
Purpose: People want to make a contribution. They want to see their work being used by happy customers. They want to see their work making other people’s lives better. Putting out poor quality products that annoy people will cause employees to want to leave an organization. Having corporate policies that violate customer’s privacy or do other semi-legal immoral corporate activities will disengage the workforce.
If a company pays a competitive salary then these items will be very important in engaging and retaining employees. But there are still other factors.
One of my favorite ways to be retained by an employer are golden handcuffs. These are benefits like stock options or future bonuses that you have to remain an employee to collect. Often these can become quite valuable making it a very difficult decision to leave. For instance stock options vest over five years and you can retain them for ten. If your company is growing and its stock is going up then these can become very valuable and walking away from them is as difficult as getting out of handcuffs. Even if you company isn’t public, having these in the hope of going public is a great retention tactic.
Technical employees like programmers value challenging work where they get to use newer technologies. This keeps people interested via continuous learning and people feel secure in their profession since they know their skills are up to date.
A lot of times technical people leave an organization because they feel their skills are getting dated and that it’s hard to learn and practice newer practices.
When performing employee surveys, often the key answers given to the question of why people stay is that they like their co-workers and/or they like their boss. To some degree this comes down to having a very positive work environment. Ensuring everyone treats everyone else with respect and that bad behavior to other people isn’t tolerated.
Another key aspect is when hiring to consider how people will fit in to the current teams and often to give team members a chance to participate in the job interview process to give their input on this.
Probably the most important relationship is between an employee and his boss and this means that ensuring managers are properly trained and that you have good managers is extremely important.
Having good vertical communications in an organization is critical. A lot of times when people are having problems or not fitting in, they are saying so, just no one is listening. Many times people leave due to misunderstandings or frustrations that they aren’t being heard. Having good clear communications channels is crucial.
Also an organization needs to ensure that all the employees know what the corporate priorities are and also what is the reasoning behind these. People won’t be engaged if they don’t understand why a company is doing something and in fact will often act against it.
Another good practice is to have good coaching and mentoring programs within the organization. These can really help with communications and employee development.
Don’t Reward the Bad
On the converse, you don’t want to retain people at any cost. If people aren’t performing, aren’t engaged or exhibit bad behavior, don’t reward them. Often company’s give out bonus’s anyway because they are worried about losing the employee. But I think in some cases it’s better for everyone if the employee finds a different opportunity. You especially don’t want to do this year after year or people just won’t have confidence in your rewards system.
Retaining employees doesn’t have to be hard. Generally employees are motivated by things that are also good for the company like pursuing innovation, pursuing learning and staying up to date. Generally a healthy happy workforce is also a productive workforce, so many of these items are in everyone’s interest. When companies lose sight of this, they get themselves into trouble.
My wife, Cathalynn, and I were recently discussing issues with people moving to other cities to pursue their careers and the hard decisions that were involved in doing this. My nephew, Ian Smith, is just starting his career and when choosing where to work has to consider what it takes to grow in the role he eventually accepts. When I started at Computer Associates, if you wanted to move up in the organization past a certain point, then you had to move to the company headquarters in New York. Similarly, when Cathalynn was working at Motorola, the upwardly mobile had to relocate to Schaumburg, Illinois.
From Cathalynn Labonté-Smith
Recently, Vancouver hosted a Heritage Classic hockey game at BC Place as have many cities across Canada. An outdoor rink facsimile was made inside an indoor venue to recreate a 1915 game complete with original uniforms and “snow”. The plan was to retract the ceiling on the dome but a torrential downpour kept the giant umbrella deployed. Despite the nostalgia of the game the Vancouver Canucks and Ottawa Senators were playing for real—this game counted for NHL points, so the integrity of the ice had to be maintained.
We’ve all heard of the glass ceiling. Indeed, yesterday (March 8th) it was International Women’s Day—a day to reflect on all aspects of women’s’ equality and well-being. In the corporate world, how are we doing? According to Catalyst only 4.6% of Fortune 1000 companies have women CEOs (http://www.catalyst.org/knowledge/women-ceos-fortune-1000).
We’ve all heard of hitting the glass ceiling, however; living on the West Coast working in the high technology sector we have what I call an umbrella ceiling that applies to both genders. Umbrella in the down or sun position–you are blessed with a lifestyle that promotes health and well-being with a year-round outdoor playground and cultural diversity. Umbrella in the up or rain position—you are blocked from moving on to a top job within any corporation that has a head office outside of British Columbia you have to leave. We’ve been to many a tearful going away party. But then if you stay as the Smiths have where are roots and family are, you many spend your weekends hiking, snowboarding, cycling, gardening, wine-tasting, cross-border shopping to Seattle and in many other wonderful pursuits, so that’s cool too.
Does it have to continue to be this way? With all the technology like Skype, other teleconferencing software, cloud applications, mobile phones, portals, access to travel and other collaborative tools that are available why do corporations still tend to centralize top officers in one location? Or, can companies truly embrace the mobile workforce including more females at the CEO level. Are they missing out on or losing top talent for this-is-the-way-we’ve-always-done-itism?
I’m turning this over to the expert, Mr. Steve himself. Cat out.
Physical versus Virtual Offices
A lot of discussion comes down to how important is face-to-face interaction. How much can be done virtually via Skype, e-mail, telepresence, chat and other collaborative technologies?
My own experience is that there are a lot of communication problems that can easily be cleared up face-to-face. Often without direct interaction, misunderstandings multiply and don’t get resolved. Probably the worst for this is e-mail. Generally, programmers don’t like to talk on the phone and so will persist with e-mail threads that lead nowhere for far too long rather than just picking up the phone and resolving the issue.
But with video calls so routine can much be handled this way instead and physical meetings kept to a minimum? Another thing that limits interactions is living in different time zones and how much time you have to interact. For example, I have days bookended by early morning and late evening conference calls.
Generally, office design has improved over the years as well to better facilitate team work and collaboration. If you aren’t in this environment are you as productive as the people that are?
Tim Bray leaves Google to stay in Vancouver
A recent high profile case of this was Tim Bray who worked at Google but lives in Vancouver. He gave a quick synopsis on his blog here. Google has a reputation as a modern web cloud company, and yet here is a case where having someone physically present is the most important qualification for the job. If Google can’t solve this problem, does anyone else have a chance?
Though personally it seems that Tim accepted the position at Google with the assumption of moving to California, so it seems a bit passive aggressive, then staying in Vancouver and just pretending he would move.
Mobility of CEOs
The ultimate metric of all this is how mobile is the CEO of a company. Does the CEO have to physically be present in the corporate headquarters for a significant percentage of their time? Does the CEO have to have a residence in the same city as the corporate headquarters? Is even the idea of a physical corporate headquarters relevant anymore in today’s world?
Many top executives spend an awful lot of their time on airplanes and in hotels. To some degree does it really matter where they live? After for modern global companies often to have the necessary face to face time with all the right people can’t be done from the corner office. Is the life of an executive similar to the life of George Clooney in Up in the Air?
I think if the CEO is in a fixed location then the upwardly mobile are going to be attracted to that location like moths to a flame. I think there is a strong fear in people of being out of the loop and for executives this can be quite career limiting.
I tend to think that face-to-face interaction and working together physically as a team has a lot of merit. Just breaking down the barriers to communications in this sort of tight knit environment can still be challenging.
I find that working remotely works very well for some people. But these people have to be strongly self-motivated and have to be able to work without nearly as much direct supervision or oversight.
I’m finding that the tools for communicating remotely are getting better and better and that this does then allow more people to work remotely, but at this point anyway, we can’t go 100% down this road.
If you have any thoughts on this, leave a comment at the end of the article.
Unstructured time is becoming a common way to stimulate innovation and creativity in organizations. Basically you give employees a number of hours each week to work on any project they like. They do need to make a proposal and at the end give a demo of working software. The idea is to work on projects that developers feel are important and are passionate about, but perhaps the business in general doesn’t think is worthwhile, too risky or has as a very low priority. Companies like Google and Intuit have been very successful at implementing this and getting quite good results.
Unstructured Time at Sage
The Sage Construction and Real Estate (CRE) development team at Sage has been using unstructured time for a while now. They have had quite a lot of participation and it has led to products like a time and expense iPhone application. Now we are rolling out unstructured time to other Sage R&D centers including ours, here in Richmond, BC.
At this point we are starting out slowly with 4 hours of unstructured time a sprint (every two weeks). Anyone using this needs to submit a project proposal and then do a demo of working code when they judge it’s advanced enough. The proposals can be pretty much anything vaguely related to business applications.
The goal is for people to work on things they are passionate about. To get a chance to play with new bleeding edge technologies before anyone else. To develop that function, program or feature that they’ve always thought would be great, but the business has always ignored. I’m really looking forward to what the team will come up with.
Crazy Projects at Google
Our unstructured time needs to be used for business applications, but I wonder what unstructured time is like at Google where they seem to come up with things that have nothing to do with search or advertising. Is it Google’s unstructured time that leads to self-driving cars, Google Glasses, military robots, human brain simulations or any of their many green projects. Hopefully these get turned into good things and aren’t just Google trying to create SkyNet for real. Maybe we’ll let our unstructured time go crazy as well?
I’m a big fan of Neal Stephenson, and recently read his novel Anathem. Neal’s novels can be a bit off-putting since they are typically 1000 pages long, but I really enjoy them. One of the themes in Anathem are monasteries occupied by mathematicians that are divided up into groups by how often they report their results to the outside world. The lower order reports every year, next is a group that reports every ten years, then a group that reports every 100 years and finally the highest group that only reports every 1000 years. These groups don’t interact with anyone outside their order except for the week when they report and exchange information/literature with the outside world. This is in contrast to how we operate today where we are driven by “internet time” and have to produce results quickly and ignore anything that can’t be done quickly.
So imagine you could go away for a year to work on a project, or go away for ten years to work on something. Perhaps going away for 100 years or 1000 years might pose some other problems that the monks in the novel had to solve. The point being is to imagine what you could accomplish if you had that long? Would you use different research approaches and methods than we use typically today? Certainly an intriguing prospect contrasting where we currently need to produce something every few months.
So why am I talking about Anathem and unstructured time together? Well one problem we have is how do you get started on big projects with lots of risk? Suppose you know we need to do something, but doing it is hard and time consuming? Every journey has to start with the first step, but sometimes making that first step can be quite difficult. I’ve had the luxury of being able to do unstructured time for some time, because I’m a software architect and not embedded in an agile sprint team. So I see technologies that we need to adopt but they are large and won’t be on Product Manager’s road maps.
So I’ve done simple POC’s in the past like producing a mobile app using Argos. But more recently I embarked on producing a 64-Bit version of Sage 300. This worked out quite well and wasn’t too hard to get going. But then I got ambitious and decided to add Unicode into the mix. This is proving more difficult, but is progressing. The difficulty with these projects is that they involve changing a large amount of the existing code base and estimating how much work they are is very difficult. As I get a Unicode G/L going, it becomes easier to estimate, but I couldn’t have taken the first step on the project without using unstructured time.
Part of the problem is that we expect our Agile teams to accurately estimate their work and then rate them on how well they do this (that they are accountable for their estimates). This has the side effect that they are then very resistant to work on things that are open ended or hard to estimate. Generally for innovation to take hold, the performance management system needs a bit of tweaking to encourage innovation and higher risk tasks, rather than only encouraging meeting commitments and making good estimates.
Now unlike Anathem, I’m not going to get 100 years to do this or even 10 years. But 1 year doesn’t seem so bad.
Now that we are adding unstructured time to our arsenal of innovation initiatives, I have high hopes that we will see all sorts of innovative new products, technologies and services emerge out of the end. Of course we are just starting this process, so it will take a little while for things to get built.
In the early days of computing you could only run one program at a time on a PC. This meant if you wanted to run 10 programs at once you needed 10 computers. Then bit by bit multitasking made its way from mainframes and Unix to PCs, which allowed you to run quite a few programs at a time. Doing this meant you could run all 10 programs on one computer and this worked quite well. However it was still quite a high overhead since each program used a lot of memory and switching between them wasn’t all that fast. This lead to the idea of multi-threading where you ran very light weight tasks inside a single program. These used the same memory and resources as the program they were running in, so switching between them was very quick and the resources used adding more threads was very minimal.
Enter the Web
Think about how this affects you if you are building a web server. You want to basically run your programs on the web server and consider if you are running in the cloud. If you were single process then each web user running your app would have a separate VM to handle his requests and he would interact with that VM. There would be a load balancer that routes the users requests to the appropriate VM. This is quite an expensive way to run since you typically pay quite a bit a month for each VM. You might be surprised to learn that there are quite a few web applications that run this way. The reason they do this is for greater security since in this model each user is completely separated from each other since they are really running against separate machines.
The next level is to have the web server start a separate process to handle the requests for a given user. Basically when a new user signs on, a new process is started and all his requests are routed to this process. This model is typically used by applications that don’t want to support multi-threading or have other concerns. Again quite a few web applications run this way, but due to the high resource overhead of each process, you can only run at best a hundred or so users per server. Much better than one per VM, but still for the number of customers companies want to use their web site, this is quite expensive.
The next level of efficiency is to have each new user that signs on, just start a new thread. This is then way less overhead since you use only a small amount of thread local storage and switching between running threads is very quick. Now we are getting into have thousands of active users running off each web server.
This isn’t the whole story. The next step is to make your application stateless. This means that rather than each user getting their own thread, we put all the threads in a common pool. Then when a request for a user comes in, we just use a free thread from the pool to process the request. This way we don’t keep any state on the server for each user, and we only need the number of threads to be able to handle the number of active requests at a given time. This means while a user is thinking or reading a response, they are using no server resources. This is how you get a web applications like Facebook that can handle billions of users (of course they still use tens of thousands of servers to do this).
These techniques aren’t only done in the operating system software, but modern hardware architectures have been optimized for these techniques as well. Modern server CPUs have multiple cores which are very efficient at running multiple threads in parallel. To really take advantage of the power of these processors you really need to be a multi-threaded application.
Sage 300 ERP
As Sage 300 moves to the cloud, we have the same concerns. We’ve been properly multi-process since our 32-Bit version, back in the version 4 days (the 16-Bit version wasn’t really multi-process because 16-Bit Windows wasn’t properly multi-process).
We laid the foundations for multi-threaded operation in version 5.6A and then fully used it starting with version 6.0A for the Portal and Quote to Orders. Since then we’ve been improving our multi-threading as it is a very foundational component to being able to utilize our Business Logic Views from Web Applications.
If you look at a general text book on multi-threading it looks quite difficult since you are having to be very careful to protect the right memory at the right time. However a lot of times these books are looking at highly efficient parallel algorithms. Whereas we want a thread to handle a specific request for a specific user to completion. We never use multiple threads to handle a single request.
From an API point of view this means each thread has its own .Net session object and its own set of open Sage 300 Business Logic Views. We keep these cached in a pool to be checked out, but we never have more than one thread operating on one of these at a time. This then greatly simplifies how our multi-threading support needs to work.
If you’ve ever programmed our Business Logic Views, they have had the idea of being multi-threaded built into them from day 1. For instance all variables that need to be kept from call to call are stored associated with the view handle. There are no global variables in these Views. Further since even single threaded programs open multiple copies of the Views and use the recursively, a lot of this support has been fully tested since it’s required for these cases as well.
For version 5.6A we had to ensure that our API had thread safe alternatives for every API and that any API that wasn’t thread safe was deprecated. The sort of thing that causes threading problems is if an API function say just returns TRUE or FALSE on whether it succeeds and then if you want to know the real reason you need to check a global variable for the last error return code. The regular C runtime has a number of functions of this nature and we used to do this for our BCD processing. Alternatives to these functions were added to just return the error code. The reason the global variable is bad, is that another thread could call one of these functions and reset this variable in between you getting the failed response and then checking the variable.
If you’ve worked with our Views you will know that they are quite state-full. We can operate statelessly for simple operations like basic CRUD operations on simple objects. However for complicated data entry (like Order Entry or Invoice Entry) we do need to keep state while the user interacts with the document. This means we aren’t 100% stateless at this point, but our hope is that as we move forwards we can work to reduce the amount of state we keep, or reduce the number of interactions that require keeping state.
Fortunately testing tools are getting better and better. We can test using the Visual Studio Load Tester as well as using JMeter. Using these tools we can uncover various resource leaks, memory problems and deadlocks which occur when multiple threads go wrong. Static code analysis tools and good old fashioned code reviews are very useful in this regard as well.
As we progress the technology behind Sage 300, we need to make sure it has the foundations to run as a modern web application and our multi-threading support is key to this endeavor.
This is a guest blog posting by my wife, Cathalynn Labonté-Smith, though I’m the one answering the questions.
It may seem odd to readers to interview the man I’ve looked across the dinner table at for 29 plus years in his own blog, but we’ve had a recent addition to our household, Ian. Steve’s nephew is an enthusiastic young man who is in a programmer’s boot camp (see Steve’s Blog entry The Times They Are a Changin) and as an educator this has brought to my mind new questions for my darling husband beyond, “How was your day?” and “Will you be able to fit in a vacation around your business travel this year?” Also, he didn’t like my alternate idea of a Valentine to Computing.
We got out of the habit of talking about the details of Steve’s work since the time I worked as a technical writer in the field of wireless technology nearly a decade ago. For couples out there who both work in the same or related fields, you will know what I mean when I say it’s just best to unwind and avoid topics to do with work in the off hours.
When I left tech writing and became a teacher, occasionally I’d walk into a business class that was learning Accpac for Windows or Simply Accounting. Trained as an English teacher I’d do what all on-call teachers do when outside their subject area: stick to the lesson plan, get help from the brightest students in the class and muddle through as best I could. So it was fun to share those experiences with Steve and I actually learned a bit about the Sage products.
It’s been many years since I’ve been in the classroom, but having taught career preparation I want to know the following from Steve for programmers coming on stream. I know that Steve’s blog audience is unlikely to be junior programmers but I thought this might get his more senior executive readers thinking about what legacy they can pass along to new programmers.
Whoa, I can hear you say, what makes you think they can hear us with their ears jammed with ear buds and if they could we don’t speak their lingo? I’m not saying they’re going to sit through a PowerPoint of your ruminations and really the best example is modelling, after all, and as a teacher I found that it was an equal exchange. You can learn as much from your novice employees as they can learn from you–just about different things.
When I met Steve he was a Teacher’s Assistant in the Math Department at the University of British Columbia working on his Master’s Degree. His Math 100 class was just him, the blackboard, a huge lecture hall packed full of nervous first-years and a piece of chalk. I was never his student, no; I was on the other side of campus in Creative Writing workshops in poetry, fiction and children’s writing.
After his degree, he worked at various software companies in many different fields as a contractor, consultant or employee before finding his long-time home at Sage. Aside from having over twenty years at Sage now in his current role as Chief Architect, I’m curious as what Uncle Steve would say to Ian if he were around longer than it takes for him to gulp down his dinner and head upstairs for more studying?
1. Steve, what kind of guidance can you offer for formal programs a would-be programmer should choose for the best future employment and advancement? Can you compare it to your formal programming education?
My undergraduate and master’s degrees are in Mathematics and not Computer Science. However’ I took a few CS courses along the way (in things like Numerical Analysis and Operations Research), so strictly speaking I don’t have a formal CS background.
I was in the Co-op program at the University of Victoria so when I did graduate I had four work terms of job experience. Plus, I was always working on some sort of programming project on my trusty Apple II Plus computer (usually involving Fractals).
It doesn’t really matter so much which programming languages you learn, just learn a variety. After all, things are changing so fast these days that you need to expect to keep learning these as you progress through your career.
To summarize, you need something that will give you lots of practice programming, a few formal courses to give you credibility and you need to be a voracious reader.
2. In your undergraduate degree, you went through a co-op program. Is this something that you recommend and why? For example, does it make a programmer more desirable as a future employee?
A. Yes, absolutely. I think intern type programs are terrific ways to get job experience and references ready for that first real job. I did four co-op work terms and learned an awful lot about how various companies operate and what is involved. It is a great chance to get some experience with a variety of companies, perhaps a large one, a small one and a government one. I certainly give credit for co-op work terms when I’m hiring.
3. What kind of summer, part-time or volunteer work might add to and develop their skills?
A. I would look for something where you are giving back to the community, such as donating your time to a charity and if you have the chance to travel when you do this then even better. Again do something that interests you and you are passionate about.
4. What kind of advice can you give new programmers about how to pick their first employer?
A. Chances are you are going to have several jobs throughout your career. More than likely the pay will be similar, so go for something interesting. Do some research on the companies you are applying to and look beyond the initial job you will have there. Also, consider travelling to a new location for your first job to get a bit more experience of the world as well.
5. Just like some doctors are better at staying current on the latest treatments and research, how do programmers stay current when there seems to be so many new technologies and programming languages to learn. How do you manage to filter through all of it to get what will last and have future value? Or is it even critical that programmers do stay current or is there enough maintenance work to go around forever?
A. I think the number one rule is to not rely on your employer for this. This is really your own professional responsibility. Employers will train you for what you need immediately but usually not for much else and not for things that they aren’t interested in.
One of the great things about the profession today is that most of the programming tools that are important are either open source or have free versions available (like Visual Studio Express). So you can dabble with all sorts of things in your spare time. All you really need is a computer and an Internet connection. I really believe in learning by doing. So pick something new and interesting and do a small project in it to see if you want to go deeper.
6. What are some common pitfalls new programmers could avoid in their early careers?
A. I think the most common pitfalls are either being too loyal to a company or giving up on a company too easily.
Often people in their career have very high and probably unrealistic expectations on how well a company is run. Often this gives rise to a lot of changing jobs after quick stints. This can be a mistake if you don’t get ahead and develop a resume with lots of short stays.
The reverse is the other common mistake—being in a job that doesn’t work, but trying to stick it out too long rather than cutting the cord. Leaving is often a hard decision to make, but is often easier earlier in your career. Finding the right compromise between these two extremes can be very difficult.
7. What is the most valuable lesson or lessons that you’ve learned throughout your career that you could share with a new programmer?
A. That things are often darkest before the dawn. On any project at some point things are going to look bad, problems look unsolvable, bugs are piling up and deadlines are being missed. The lesson here is not to take the whole world’s problems on your shoulders, but to just work through the problems one by one. Often these are difficult problems that take much more time than you would have thought, but sticking to this eventually yields the light at the end of the tunnel.
Another take on this is to remain optimistic in the face of adversity. Or follow the Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy’s main advice: Don’t Panic! (Their other advice of always carry a towel, I’m not so sure about).
8. Who were your early role models?
A. Bill Gates and Steve Wozniak for what they did to start their companies. Steve Jobs for what he did when he returned to Apple.
9. Is there anything you would have done differently in your early career knowing what you know now?
A. There are always so many shoulda coulda wouldas. Now I know which companies back then paid the big bucks in stock options, but it’s hard to predict when looking forwards. I sometimes wonder if I should have moved from Vancouver, but then you get a beautiful day like today and just say “Nah”.
10. Is there a question that I didn’t ask that you wished I did?
A. No, this blog is already getting quite long J.
Point taken, Steve, this is a good place to wrap it up. Oh and, Happy Valentine’s Day, to you and to all your readers.
We hold a developer’s exchange (DevEx) every couple of weeks where one of our developers volunteers to present to all the other developers in our office. This past week I presented at the DevEx on what all the core DLLs in our Sage 300 runtime folder do. I thought this might be of interest for a wider audience so here are the gory details.
Our marketing supplied architecture diagram is the following which highlights our three tiers and hide a lot of the details of how the object repository, APIs and supporting services are implemented. I’ve blogged previously on our Business Logic Views. In this article I’m going to go into more detail on all the DLLs that provide the framework to support all of this.
Lower Level DLLs
If you are an ISV developing Sage 300 SDK applications or have worked for Sage on the 300 product then you will have had to encounter a number of these DLLs. I’m only looking at a subset of current DLLs, and I’m not looking at all the DLLs that support older technologies that are still present to maintain compatibility with add-ons.
I didn’t add arrows to this diagram since everything pretty well calls everything else below it. But segregated the DLLs a bit by how low or high level they are. So here is a quick synopsis of each one:
A4wcompat.dll: We created this DLL back when we did a native port of the Sage 300 Views for Linux. This DLL isolates operating system differences that need more than some clever #defines. A big part of this is the thread and process synchronization and locking support. Even though we never released the native Linux version, this isolation of operating system dependent parts had made adding multi-threading support, 64 bit support and Unicode support easier.
A4wmem32.dll: In 16 bit Windows, the built in memory management was really slow, so everyone used their own. Now this DLL uses the Windows and C default memory management, but is still important for global memory that needs to be shared across processes. Originally this was done through the data segment of a fixed DLL, but now is done through memory mapped files.
A4wlleng.dll: This is just a language DLL that holds some lower level error messages used by System manager.
A4wsqls.dll: This is the SQL Server database driver (there is also a4worcl.dll for Oracle and a4wbtrv.dll for Pervasive.SQL). This is dynamically loaded based on the type of database you are connecting to. For more on our database support see this article.
Cato3msk.dll, cato3dat.dll: The cato3 DLLs are the old CA common controls. We don’t use these in our UIs anymore, but cato3msk.dll provides our mask processing that is used by the Views. Similarly we don’t use this date control, but do use a routine here to format dates in error messages correctly.
A4wroto.dll: This handles the loading of the various View DLLs as well as the various UIs we’ve used in the past. It loads the roto.dat files and handles loading the right DLLs when View subclassing is going on or stub Views need to be used.
A4wsem.dll: This handles the locking of the semaphor.bin file. It allows processes to lock the company database, an application or the whole site. It also handles application specific cross workstation locking needs.
A4wrv.dll: This is the main DLL API entry point for the Views. It manages all the calling of the Views and handles other tasks like sending the calls for macro recording. For more on our View interfaces see this article.
A4wapi.dll: This is quite a hodge-podge of services for the Views like revision lists, error reporting and such. It also has support routines for the older CA-Realizer UIs. This is quite a big DLL and has most of our C level API in it.
A4wrpt.dll: This is our interface to Crystal Reports, it started as our interface to CA-RET then was converted to Crystal using their CRPE DLL interface, then converted to Crystal’s COM interface and now uses Crystal’s .Net Interface.
A4wprgt.dll: This DLL handles replicating the system database tables into the various company databases when needed.
A4wmtr.dll: This is our meter DLL for long running processes. It can either put up a meter dialog or just report back to the caller, the current status and percent complete. It also provides the API for cancelling long running processes.
Higher Level APIs
The next level are some of the DLLs that make up our Java, COM and .Net interfaces. There is a bit of complexity here due to how our previous web deployed system worked. Here we could communicate back to the server originally using DCOM and then later with .Net Remoting. The .Net Remoting layer provides both the communications layer for this web deployed mode and also acts as our .Net API. Depending on how you create your original session will configure which actual DLLs are used and which are calling conventions are used.
A4wapiShim.dll: This is the C side of our Java JNI layer. It talks to all the lower level DLLs to get its work done.
Sajava.jar: This is the Java side of our Java JNI interface. This allows Java programs to easily call Java classes to interface to our Business Logic Views. For more on this interface see this article.
A4wcomsv.dll: This is the main workhorse for the COM and .Net APIs. It does all the heavy lifting and interfacing to the core DLLs.
Accpac.Advantage.COMSVR.Interop.dll: This just performs the .Net to COM transition which is created by the MS tools.
Accpac.Advantage.Server.dll: Server side of the .Net API, handles the .Net Remoting requests if remotely called or just passes through otherwise.
Accpac.Advantage.Types.dll: Defines all the various types we use in our .Net API.
Accpac.Advantage.dll: This is the main external interface for our .Net API. For more on our .Net API see the series of articles starting with this one.
A4wcomexps.dll: Used when the VB UIs are going to talk .Net Remoting, this DLL is inside a4wcomex.cab.
A4wcomex.dll: The main entry point for the COM API.
Many More DLLs
There are many more DLLs in the Sage 300 runtime, but most of the others are for obsolete APIs like the xapi, the older a4wcom COM API, the cmd API, the icmd API, etc. There are other important ones like to do with Database Setup, but these are the main ones used when you talk to the Business Logic through one of the main popular APIs.
For anyone interested this should give you a good idea of what the main DLLs in the runtime folder do. And give you an idea of how the various services in Sage 300 ERP are layered.
Right now we have our nephew Ian living with us as he takes a Lighthouse Labs developer boot camp program in Ruby on Rails and Web Programming. This is a very intense course that has 8 weeks instruction and then a guaranteed internship of at least 4 weeks with a sponsoring company. A lot of this is an immersion in the current high tech culture that has developed in downtown Vancouver. This corresponds with myself working to expand the Sage 300 ERP development team in Richmond and our hiring efforts over the past several months. This article is then based on a few observations and experiences around these two happenings.
Sage 300 ERP has been around for over thirty years now and this has caused us to have quite a few generations of programmers all working on the product. Certainly over this time the various theories of what a high tech office should look like and what a talented programmer wants in a company has changed quite dramatically. As Sage moves forwards we need to change with the times and adopt a lot of these new ways of doing things and accommodate these new preferred lifestyles.
Generally people go through three phases of their career, starting single, no kids, renting to transitioning to married, home ownership and eventually kids to kids leaving home and considering retiring. Of course these days there can be some major career changes along the way as industries are disrupted and people need to retrain and reeducate themselves. Every office needs a good mix, to build a diverse, energetic and innovative culture, which has experience but is still willing to take risks.
Offices or No Offices
The ambition was to have as much privacy as possible which usually translated to high cube walls, other barriers and the ambition to one day move into an office. At the time Microsoft advertised that on their campus every employee got an office, so they could concentrate and think to be more effective at their work. I visited the Excel team at this time and they had two buildings packed with lots of very small offices which led to long narrow claustrophobic hallways.
A lot has changed since then. Software development has much more adopted the Scrum/Agile model where people work together as a team and social interactions are very important. Further as products move to the cloud, the developers need to team up with DevOps and all sorts of other people that are crucial for their product’s success.
Now most firms adopt more open office approach. There are no permanent offices, everyone works together as a team.
There is a lot of debate about which is better. People used to more privacy of offices and cubes are loathe to lose that. People that have been using the open office approach can’t imagine moving back to cubes. Also with more people working a percentage of their time from home, a permanent spot at the offices doesn’t always make sense.
Downtown versus the Suburbs
When I started with CA the office was located in town near Granville Island. This was a great location, central, many good restaurants, and easily accessible via transit. Then we moved out to Richmond to a sprawling high tech park like many of the similar companies in the 90s. These were all sprawling landscapes of three story office buildings each one with a giant parking lot surrounding it. All very similar whether in Richmond, Irvine, Santa Clara or elsewhere.
Now the trend is reversing and people are moving back to downtown. Most new companies are located in or near downtown and several large companies have setup major development centers in town recently. Now the high tech parks in the suburbs are starting to have quite a few vacancies.
The Younger Generation
A lot of this is being driven by the twenty-something generation. What they look for in a company is quite different today than what I looked for when I started out. There are quite a few demographic changes as well as lifestyle changes that are driving this. A few key driving factors are:
- The number of young people getting drivers licenses and buying cars is shrinking. There are a lot of reasons for this. But people who can’t drive have trouble getting to the suburbs.
- People are having children later in life. Often putting it off until their late thirties or even forties.
- City cores are being re-vitalized. Even Calgary and Edmonton are trying to get urban sprawl under control.
- Real estate in the desirable high tech centers like San Francisco, Seattle or Vancouver is extremely expensive. Loft apartments downtown are often the way to go.
- Much more work is done at home and if coffee shops.
This all makes living and working downtown much more preferable. It is also leading to people requiring less space and looking for more social interactions.
Hiring that Younger Generation
To remain competitive a company like Sage needs to be able to hire younger people just finishing their education. We need the infusion of youth, energy and new ideas. If a company doesn’t get this then it will die. Right now the hiring market is very competitive. There is a lot of venture capital investment creating hot new companies, many existing companies are experiencing good growth and generally the percentage of the economy driven by high tech is growing. Another problem is that industries like construction, mining and oil are booming, often hiring people at very high wages before they even think about post-secondary education.
What we are finding is that many young people don’t have cars, live downtown and are looking to work in a cool open office concept building.
We are in the process of converting our offices to a more modern open office environment. We do allow people to work at home some days. Maybe we will even be able to move back downtown once the current lease expires? Or maybe we will need to create a satellite office downtown.
Generally we have to become more involved with both the educational institutions by hiring co-op students and other interns. We need to participate in more activities of the local developer and educational community like the HTML500. We need to ensure that Sage is known to the students and that they consider it a good career path to embark on. Often hiring co-op students now can lead to regular full time employees later.
Since Sage has been around for a long time and has a large solid customer base, we offer a stable work environment. You know you will receive your next pay check. Many startups run out of funding or otherwise go broke. Often while the job market is hot, young people don’t worry about this too much, but as you get into a mortgage, this can become more important.
The times are changing and not only do our developers need to keep retraining and learning how to do things differently, but so do our facilities departments, IS departments and HR departments. Change is often scary, but it is also exciting and stops life from becoming boring.
Personally, I would much rather work downtown (I already live there). I think I will be sad when I give up my office, but at the same time I don’t want to become the stereotypical old person yelling at the teenagers to get off my lawn. Overall I think I will prefer a more mobile way of working, not so tied to my particular current office.
Now that we’ve released Sage 300 Online as well as the on-premise Sage 300 ERP 2014, we need to change the way we develop features going forwards. We would like to develop features and frequently deploy these to Sage 300 Online so that customers can take advantage of these as soon as possible. Plus we would like to start including more features in our Product Updates.
This means that we have two separate products that would like to release features out of the same source code on their own timelines.
This article describes some of the issues with doing this and describes some aspects of the procedures we are following. In some cases there are additional benefits and in some cases there is additional work.
Generally we are switching from releasing big bang product versions every year or so, to releasing updates on a much frequent basis. I’ve blogged about this before in these articles: SaaSifying Sage and SaaSifying Accpac. This article is really just covering one aspect of this process, namely around how we now use our source control system. This is one aspect of a continuous deployment pipeline. It also involves the DepOps team.
A key ingredient into making this all work is having good “Doneness Criteria”, so that when agile stories are completed they are fully done, including all testing, automation, documentation, etc. So that when a “done” story is included in the release it really works. The closer you can come to this the better. If you aren’t very close then you are going to need a lot of integration/regression testing steps between these minor small feature releases to ensure the quality of the product. An important aspect of this is to have good automated tests to find integration problems and reduce manual regression testing.
Source Code Branching
Source code control systems have the concept of branching, where you can create a branch for a feature and then go through the agile process developing the feature and when you are all done then you merge the branch back into the product. This is a very simple branching strategy which works great if you are developing one feature at a time. However in reality there is a lot of work going on simultaneously including multiple features being developed at once, sustainment work (bug fixing) and infrastructure work (like the 64 Bit version).
Modern source control systems like Subversion and Git provide very powerful features to easily create branches and to incorporate changes from other branches and finally merge branches back together. We’ve used Subversion for some time now and have a lot of source code and history stored here. But for new projects we’ve been creating them in Git, partly due to the more powerful branching features.
To work effectively there are usually quite a few branches, but hopefully not as many as on the fractal tree below.
So what sort of branches do we need? Potentially we could create a lot of branches in the Source Code. The main root of all the branches is called the trunk and we always want the trunk to be in a releasable state. Perhaps we can have a development branch, and a regression branch. Then from the development branch we fork off the individual features as separate branches. Then when we are happy with them we merge them into the regression branch for more testing and when this is competed they are merged into the trunk.
Generally this works well for one product, say a web product where the DevOps team controls what gets merged from the regression branch into the trunk. However when you have multiple products derived from the same source tree this can be quite complicated.
Another danger of too much branching is that the longer a branch lives, the further it can get from the trunk due to work done on other branches and then merging back into a main branch and the trunk gets more difficult. This can be alleviated by merging changes done elsewhere into your branch, so you have smaller merges along the way rather than a bit difficult merge at the end. Another advantage we have in Sage 300, is that it’s a very large product consisting of hundreds of DLLs, OCXs and EXEs. As a result different teams are often operating in quite different areas of the source code. However there will still be points of contention, one that is happening right now is multiple features being added to the reporting engine that is creating contention on that source code module.
So for a branching strategy we need to strike a compromise between keeping everything perfectly isolated and having a lot of gates for features to pass through versus keeping the management of the system down and reducing the difficulty in merging branches.
So our approach is to limit the number of branches. Trunk is the main branch that is released to production (i.e. customers). Nothing is developed directly on the trunk, everything needs to be developed on a feature branch. Before merging back into trunk, a feature must merge the trunk back into the feature first and the team developing the feature must do some testing (including running our full automated testing suite). Then the feature can be merged back into the trunk and the feature is available for either the Online or on-premise products to consume.
Of course this has consequences on other components in the build pipeline. Now rather than just build the trunk with our set of build servers, we have to build all these branches. As part of the build we run a number of unit tests, but we also have a large set of automated tests that run on a separate set of servers, and now we want to run these automated tests on the branches.
Generally this increases the logistics of maintaining all these sets of servers. The build servers need to be configured on what branch to run and then the output of that build needs to be fed into the automated test servers to run all the tests.
Generally this all improves the quality and keeps the trunk in a releasable state since a lot of testing has been done before the feature is merged into the trunk.
For newer components like the Sage 300 Online home page and the Sage 300 ERP provisioning engine, these are built entirely using ASP.Net and then built and deployed using TeamCity. This simplifies the whole process and we can use a more sophisticated branching strategy in conjunction with DevOps where they have a release branch which only they control where they can have complete control on what they merge, build and deploy.
We’ve been putting this infrastructure in place for some time now and have it operating fairly smoothly. Now we will really start putting it into practice by releasing features frequently on two product lines. The main test that we’ve done it right is that it’s seamless to customers because we’ve been able to maintain high quality with all these processes and technologies in place.
My first computer was an Apple II Plus, which didn’t even support lower case characters. Everything was upper case. To do word processing you used special characters to change case. Now we expect our computer to not just handle upper and lower case characters, but accented characters, special symbols, all the Asian language characters, all the Arabic characters and everything else.
In the beginning there was ASCII which allowed computers to encode the alphabet, numbers and the common typewriter characters, all 127 of them. Then we added another 127 characters for accented characters. But there were quite a few different accented characters so we had a standard first 127 characters and then various options for the upper 127 characters. This allowed us to handle most European languages on computers. Then there was the desire to support Chinese characters which number in the tens of thousands. So the idea came along to represent these as two bytes or 16 bits. This worked well, but it still only supported one language at a time and often ran out of characters. In developing this there were quite a few standards and quite a bit of incompatibility of moving files containing these between computers systems. But generally the first 127 characters were the original ASCII characters and then the rest depended on the code page you chose.
To try to bring some order to this mess and make the whole problem easier, Unicode was invented. The idea here was to have one character set that contained all the characters from all the languages in the world. Sounds like a good idea, but of course Computer Scientists underestimated the problem. They assumed this would be at most 64K characters and that they could use 2 bytes to represent each character. Like the 640K memory barrier, this turned out to be quite a bad idea. In fact there are now about 110,000 Unicode characters and the number is growing.
Unicode specifies all the characters, but it allows for different encodings. These days the two most common are UTF8 and UTF16. Both of these have pros and cons. Microsoft chose UTF16 for all their systems. Since I work with Sage 300 and since we are trying to solve this on Windows that is what we will discuss in this article. To convert Sage 300 to Unicode using UTF8 would probably have been easier since UTF8 was designed to give better compatibility with ASCII, but we live in a Windows UTF16 world where we want to interact well with SQL Server and the Windows API.
Microsoft adopted UTF16 because they felt it would be easier, since basically each string became twice as long since every character was represented by 2 bytes. Hence memory doubled everywhere and it was simple to convert. This was fine except that 2 bytes doesn’t hold every Unicode character anymore, so some characters actually take 2 16-byte slots. But generally you can mostly predict the number of characters in a given amount of memory. It also lends itself better to just using array operations rather than having to go through strings with next/previous operations.
Windows took the approach that to maintain compatibility they would offer two APIs, one for ANSI and one for Unicode. So any Windows API call that takes a string as a parameter will have two versions, one ending A (for ANSI) and one ending in W (for Wide). Then in Windows.h if you compile with UNICODE defined then it uses the W version, else it uses the A version. This certainly adds a lot of pollution to the Windows API. But they maintained compatibility with all pre-existing programs. This was all put in place as part of Win32 (since recompiling was necessary).
For Sage 300 we’ve resisted going all in on Unicode, because we don’t want to double the size of our API and maintain that for all time, and if we do release a Unicode version then it will break every third party add-in and customization out there. We have the additional challenge that Unicode doesn’t work very well in VB6.
But with our 64 Bit version, we are not supporting VB6 (which will never be 64Bit) and all third parties have to make changes for 64 Bit anyway, so why not take advantage of this and introduce Unicode at the same time? This would make the move to 64 Bit more work, but hopefully will be worth it.
Why Switch to Unicode
Converting a large C/C++ application to Unicode is a lot of work. Why go to the effort? Sage 300 has had a traditional and simplified Chinese versions for a long time. What benefits does Unicode give us over the current double byte system we support?
One is that in double byte, only one character set can be installed on Windows at a time. This means for our online version we need separate servers to host the Chinese version. With Unicode we can support all languages from one set of servers, we don’t need separate sets of servers for each language group. This makes managing the online server farm much easier and much more uniform for upgrading and such. Besides our online offerings, we have had customers complain that when running Terminal Server they need separate ones for various branch offices in different parts of the world using different languages.
Another advantage that now we can support mixtures of script, so users can enter Thai in one field, Arabic in another and Chinese in another. Perhaps a bit esoteric, but it could have uses for optional fields where there are different ones for different locales.
Another problem we tend to have is with sort orders in all these different incompatible multi-byte character systems. With Unicode this becomes much more uniform (although there are still multiple of these) and much easier to deal with. Right now we avoid the problem by limiting key fields to upper case alphanumeric. But perhaps down the road with Unicode we can relax this.
A bit advantage is ease of setup. Getting the current multi-byte systems working requires some care in setting up the Windows server that often challenges people and causes problems. With Unicode, things are already setup correctly so this is much less of a problem.
Converting Sage 300
SQL Server already supports Unicode. Any UI technology newer than VB6 will also support Unicode. So that leaves our Business Logic layer, database driver and supporting DLLs. These are all written in C/C++ and so have to be converted to Unicode.
We still need to maintain our 32-Bit non-Unicode version and we don’t want two sets of source code, so we want to do this in such a way that we can compile the code either way and it will work correctly.
At the lower levels we have to use Microsoft’s tchar.h file which provides defines that will compile one way when _UNICODE is defined and another when it isn’t. This is similar to how Windows.h works for the Windows runtime, only it does it for the C runtime. For C++ you need a little extra for the string class, but we can handle that in plustype.h.
One annoying thing is that to specify a Unicode string in C, you do l”abc”, and with the macro in tchar.h, you change it to _T(“abc”). Changing all the strings in the system this way is certainly a real pain. Especially since 99.99% of these will never contain a non-ASCII character because they are for debugging or logging. If Microsoft had adopted UTF8 this wouldn’t have been necessary since the ASCII characters are the same, but with UTF16 this, to me is the big downside. But then it’s pretty mechanical work and a lot of it can be automated.
At higher levels of Sage 300, we rely more on the types defined in plustype.h and tend to use routines form a4wapi.dll rather than using the C runtime directly. This is good, since we can change these places to compile for either and hide a lot of the details from the application programmer. The other is that we only need to convert the parts of the system that deal with the database and the parts that deal with string handling (like error messages).
One question that comes up is what will be the length on fields in the database? Right now if it’s 60 characters then its 60 bytes. Under this method of converting the application the field will be 60 UTF16 characters for 120 bytes. (This is true if you don’t use the special characters that require 4 bytes, but most characters are in the standard 64K block).
Moving to both 64 Bits and Unicode is quite an exciting prospect. It will open up the doors to all sorts of advanced features, and really move our application ahead in a major way. It will revitalize the C/C++ code base and allow some quite powerful capabilities.
As a usual disclaimer, this article is about some research and proof of concept work we are doing and doesn’t represent a commitment as to which future version or edition this will surface in.
Last weekend I visited my parents in Victoria and my mom mentioned that she had finally used up all the computer punch cards I had left her when I graduated U-Vic. She likes them because they are more solid than paper but lighter than cardboard and are ideal for using as shopping lists and such. To have lasted this long shows how many cards I needed to do all my first and second year Computer Science courses back then at U-Vic.
This got me to thinking on how entering data into computers has changed over my career. Data entry is changing at an even faster rate these days, so I thought it might be fun to look back and to look forwards as well.
I’m not sure if this makes me appear very old, or shows how slow educational institutions adopt new technology. Not only was I the last first year computer science class to have to use punch cards, but I was also the last year when you weren’t allowed to use calculators in the Provincial exams and had to use a slide rule.
Basically the terminal printed what you typed and sent it to the computer when you hit enter and then would echo anything sent back. Rather primitive. Certainly was different editing files this way. Back then Basic used line numbers and you edit lines by specifying what you wanted done to a specific line by number.
IBM Punched Cards
Then I went to the University of Victoria, which was a step backwards. Rather than a nice online terminal like the LA36, we had to enter data via punched cards and then receive the output later from a managed line printer.
You had to be careful what you typed since each run took quite a bit of time and used up money from your account. You got good at using functions like duplicating cards up to a point and were always very careful not to drop them. Given the nature of the medium, it was surprisingly robust, in that the cards were actually pretty reliable.
Once I hit third year, we were allowed to use video terminals to do our Computer Science work. Some people were lucky enough to use very compact languages like APL to program. Others of us had to manage rather slow editors using cursor keys. Admittedly a huge improvement over the LA36 or punch cards.
For my first Co-op work term, I worked at Island Medical Labs and programmed a Radio Shack TRS-80 computer to do a number of calculations and to print a number of reports for the lab. This was my introduction to personal computing and I was so happy to have a computer all to myself, rather than the time sharing systems I was used to. It had disk drives and a daisy wheel printer. Lots of fun programming in Basic for this.
After my first co-op work term I used much of my earnings to buy a brand new Apple II+. Since I mostly took Numerical Analysis type CS courses, I was actually able to do quite a few labs off my Apple II+. I had to take a cassette tape downtown to get a print out at a computer store since I didn’t have a printer yet (or a disk drive).
A big innovation came when the Apple Lisa came out and introduced the world to the mouse and the GUI Operating System. This was a huge leap forward. I never owned a Lisa or Mac, but eventually started using Windows, a rather pale copy in those days.
Along the way there were quite a few devices that used touch as an input mechanism. But none of them were popular until the iPhone came along. Like GUIs and the mouse, Apple brought this into the mainstream. I have an iPhone 4s and really love it. Using this device is very easy and once used to it, I don’t miss the keyboard from my previous Blackberry at all.
Voice input is finally starting to work properly. Tools like Apple’s Siri are actually starting to be useful. I blogged on this previously here. Certainly people are relying on this in their cars to dial phone and to select music. Even to ask Siri trivia questions as you drive along.
Gesture is still fairly controversial. It’s not clear whether Kinect helps or hinders Xbox. People like the concept but are put off by an always on video camera into their living room. We aren’t quite at the level of Minority Report yet, but we are getting there. I’m not sure what this will do to the cube office environment once this goes mainstream.
Although not really an input device, Virtual Reality and VR Goggles are closely related. In these immersive worlds they combine voice and gesture input with providing an immersive complete visual view. The Oculus Rift was quite popular at CES this year. It will be interesting to see if these can successfully be productized and achieve a mass appeal.
I blogged previously on Google Glasses here. These are fairly controversial. Google is just in the process of releasing these into the mainstream market. It will be interesting to see if they are accepted. They are expensive, and wearers are commonly called glassholes. I’m not sure everyone else likes being filmed all the time, so it will be interesting to see how this evolves.
We are starting to see devices that can interpret and act on the electrical signals generated from the brain. Right now it takes a fair bit of concentration and training to use these, but as these get more refined, how long before we can practically control our computers via thinking? How long before we have a USB port embedding into our neck where we can read USB sticks directly?
We’ve come a long way from punched cards to Google Glasses. We’ve adapted input devices from all sorts of innovative techniques from keyboards to mice to touch to voice to gestures and R&D into new techniques is progressing at a breakneck pace. It will be really amazing what comes out over the next few years. Which experimental technologies go mainstream, which mainstream technologies die out?