One of the things I’ve been curious about lately is how much of a role technology plays in current self-sufficiency efforts. For example, there has been a strong emphasis on heirloom (heritage) plants and animals, rather than using plants and animals that science has helped to produce, because these older varieties offer things that modern science can’t. For many people, the main reason to rely on heirloom varieties is that they always produce the same thing. If you plant an heirloom seed, you get the expected plant, rather than something mysterious that results from hybridization. Of course, there are people of the opposite persuasion who feel that that older varieties lack the benefits that science can provide, such as increased yield or better taste.
Technology also affects technique. Some people eschew modern machines and do all of the work required to meet their self-sufficiency requirements by hand. The benefits are that the carbon footprint of such efforts is incredibly small, costs are low, and the results often better. Using technology makes things faster and easier. Just how much technology you use depends on the size of your work area and the results you expect. Many people use a combination of hand and machine techniques.
Most people recognize that the use or lack of technology has a significant impact on the outcome of self-sufficiency efforts. In addition, the choices we make affect our neighbors and the planet to some degree. Choosing the best options for one scenario often lead to problems in another. That’s why there is growing debate over just how much technology is good for those who engage in self-sufficiency as I do. I’m constantly looking for a better answer—one that produces good results with a minimum of effort, but is also good for the planet.
The question that I have pondered most as of late is how technology affects the presentation of information. The problem for anyone writing about self-sufficiency is that no one really knows for sure just how people get self-sufficiency information. For example, do you rely heavily on questions you ask online to obtain information? Would you purchase e-books instead of the paper variety in order to reduce the cost of the information, while also reducing the effects of producing paper on the planet? In order to do a good job of providing information to you, I need to know how you communicate. Let me know your ideas on the topic at John@JohnMuellerBooks.com.
In my book, C# Design and Development, I discuss the need to consider the application environment in a number of places. For example, on page 106 you’ll find a discussion of the corporate environment on the requirements for application speed. A discussion on page 431 describes the need to achieve application goals while treading softly on the user’s environmental settings. Application environment can include a lot of different considerations. That’s the reason the ComputerWorld article entitled, “‘Consumerization of IT’ taking its toll on IT managers” struck a cord with me today. IT is now faced with a situation where users rely on personal devices more often than corporate-supplied devices, which is wreaking havoc in many ways.
The article will enlighten you about the woes that IT faces. What the article doesn’t describe are the woes that the developer faces. When an application developer creates a new application for the corporate environment or provides changes to an existing application, the testing process must consider the devices that the application will run on. When the developer works with a known set of corporate-supplied devices, the testing process is predictable. However, when the developer must also consider personal devices, the testing process is more like the environment for shrink-wrapped software, which means that the developer must now consider an open environment in which the user could rely on any device. In fact, developers must consider the following application design, development, and testing issues as a minimum due to consumerization.
Security: Early corporate applications didn’t come with much security at all. As government regulations, data breaches, and other issues have come to light, developers have added security to application, but not at the level of shrink-wrapped software and certainly not enough to ensure protection of corporate data.
Reliability: Every device that accesses an application has different characteristics. These characteristics determine how the device interacts with the application. Adding devices increases the number of potential interaction types and reduces overall application reliability due to issues with non-compliant devices. Obviously, testing can no longer have even a hope of finding every application interaction issue, so developer will need to create a robust application error handling mechanism with the organization.
Presentation: As device types increase, so do the presentation environments that the application must service. It isn’t just the fact that these devices will have different sized screens, but also the need to address audio and input characteristics of a wide range of devices. A developer must now consider how best to define an application interface so it works with the broadest range of devices possible.
Multiplatform Considerations: A development staff may begin designing an application to work on a particular platform, such as Windows, only to find that users also want the application to work on Android or the iOS. Even when the user sticks with desktop or tablet devices, the application may need to support Linux or OS X. In short, the development staff needs to consider multiple platforms when creating an application today. Unfortunately, Web-based applications aren’t always the best choice—leaving the development staff with some tough decisions to make.
There are other considerations to make, but you get the idea. Today’s development environment has become extremely complex due to consumerization. Unless your organization has firm policies about personal device usage in place and actually acts on those policies, you need to consider the idea that the user could access your application using just about any device on the market today. You have a number of ways to deal with this situation, including the following suggestions:
- Create a list of tested configurations so that users know which devices are most likely to work with the application.
- Make users part of the initial design process so that you hear about needed device support as early as possible.
- Track new device releases because many users will get the latest gadget and expect it to work with your application.
- Define a specific procedure for adding new devices to the application support list so that you don’t have to deal with user requests in a confused manner.
- Keep an open mind because users will work with personal devices whether you support them or not.
This whole issue of consumerization could easily consume a chapter or more in a book. What have your experiences been with consumerization? Is the new application development environment becoming impossible to manage? Let me know your thoughts at John@JohnMuellerBooks.com.