Slashdot Mirror
Are we Headed for a Wiki World?
Wikipedian writes "BusinessWeek
asks are
we headed for a Wiki World?. With
US-based SocialText
using their wiki to leverage just $600K in capital, and
European competitor Team Notepad,
not to mention freeware alternatives like
TWiki and
MoinMoin
is the whole world going to be using
wikis
instead of the proprietary dinosaurs like
Lotus Notes?"
[I]s the whole world going to be using wikis instead of the proprietary dinosaurs like Lotus Notes?
God, I hope so. Lotus Notes is a beast. It stops working whenever it feels like it, and occasionally corrupts the database just to make your day.
OTOH, I don't know if TWiki is the answer. Something like it perhaps, but TWiki itself tends to be unwieldily, visually confusing, and ugly. PHPWiki solved many of the problems by taking the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid!) path, but lost a lot of functionality along the way. MediaWiki (the Wiki that runs Wikipedia) is probably the best compromise, but it lacks some of the security features that make TWiki viable in a corporate environment.
If I had to choose, I'd probably say that extending MediaWiki would result in the best option. MediaWiki is clean, easy to use, and (always important) extremely feature rich. The advantage is that it got that way through several rewrites and careful coding by its maintainers. The disadvantage is that another rewrite might leave you stranded with a difficult upgrade path.
One way or another, a Wiki design is definitely the right idea for corporate "document" databases.
Javascript + Nintendo DSi = DSiCade
If Lotus Notes was a character on Kill Bill, it would go something like this...
e ring/iarchitect/lotus.htm
Lotus Notes: Larry, there ain't no mail out there!
Larry Gomez : There ain't no mail out there... Larry... What's your point? That you're not needed here?
Lotus Notes: My point is, I'm the groupware... and there ain't no mail out there to deliver!
Larry Gomez : You're saying that the reason... that you're not doing the job... that I'm... paying you to do... is, that you don't have a job to do? Is that what you're saying? What are you trying to convince me of, exactly? That you're as useless as an asshole right here? Well guess what, Lotus Notes. I think, you just fucking convinced me!
Really, I have to use Lotus at my current job and have had to use it at previous ones too. I never thought I'd say it, but I miss MS Exchange Server. Who needs Lotus when you have pop3 and a text file every can edit...at least it would work most of the time. Never before have I used such a frustrating, stupid, ugly, ineffective product. Give me a ham sandwich over Lotus Notes.
Also of interest, an in-depth analysis of Lotus Notes on the User Interface Hall of Shame.
http://digilander.libero.it/chiediloapippo/Engine
Freeware ?!?!?!?
It's even better then that. It's GPL!. How can slashdot write about GPL'ed software that it's freeware?
But not just because proprietary, expensive behemoths like Lotus Notes are proprietary or expensive, but because the web and HTTP are the current application delivery mechanisms. If you can't view it or use it from a browser, then it may as well not exist.
The next hurdle that wiki-type systems will face, though, is metadata. Even if Google got into the wiki business and provded stellar searching technology for wikis, there's only so far you can go before you face the metadata problem. As the project, team, organization, and inter-organization relationships grow, so does the need for metadata to manage it all. This is where RDF and Berners-Lee's semantic web can certainly help out. RDF-enabled wikis would be just amazing.
IMHO the Wiki concept is a revolution that's not comparable to any other development since the invention of the Web itself by Sir Lee... Think of Wikipedia or the original c2.com wiki, both examples of the success of this idea. These sites are driven by the users themselves, and are able to gather astonishing amounts of high quality information.
The beautiful thing about Wikis is that they scale to any size. I use Wiki for personal information management. My company uses Wiki as a kind of rapid CMS (which effectively replaced Lotus Notes in that function btw), as do the big sites I've mentioned with millions of users.
Some custom extensions can turn Wiki into tech unbeatable by any commercial product - because the concept just works (tm)...
Maybe it is me but evertime I see a site the has wiki for an FAQ I cringe. I can't seem to find anything on a wiki. ... of course I can't find an example at the moment.
Usually though there doesn't seem to be any content.
I can only speak for myself, but I work at a startup, and we use a Wiki everyday. Since we've got no IT department (yet), we have outsourced the Wiki to somebody like SocialText and it works great.
One word of caution, though: If you value your Wiki information anything (and you should, often it's a big value of your company), make sure that you make backups to some machines not in the hand of the provider regularly: a provider might go out of business, in which case you don't want to loose all your data.
And even more importantly: Make sure you choose a provider that supports an open standard, where you can find another provider to switch over just in case.
We considered many different wikis, but we found only one standard to be already so big that it's very likely that it will still be there in 5 years - and that the mediawiki standard, of wikipedia fame.
I'm a little confused - how are wiki's and notes even remotely similar? One is a groupware application for scheduling, contacts, and mail. It is also a development platform for forms and workflow. I didn't think that it was generally used for content management or information management. I mean, I don't like notes or anything but I'm just not sure if that's an accurate comparison. Correct me if I'm wrong.
(1) The wiki does not provide business process automation. Notes can be used to automatically forward items on to the "next responsible party" - it's a controlled, push mechanism. Can't be matched by a wiki.
(2) The wiki does not provide e-mail or calendaring functions.
(3) The wiki does not provide off-line capability. Notes provides an off-line capability that allows you to replicate data back into the database once you connect
(4) Notes gives me the capability to set up my own private area (database) where I propose the security list, that resides on a server, without the intervention of an administrator or anyone technologically savvy. (Ours is called Database-oh-matic).
Net: Notes lives!
Instiki is by far the easiest wiki to setup and configure that I've tried. It would only take you a few minutes to try it out. It's especially easy to install on OSX and after doing so it will show up on your toolbar. And it has pdf and TeX output.
I've recently started a new job, at a managed services company. I've started my own wiki, initially MoinMoin but now MediaWiki, and it's the most useful thing I've ever had for work.
I've put into it everything I've discovered in the two months I've been there, and so has a coworker. Previously there was a lot of formal documentation, but it's hard to leverage in a rush.
The wiki gets right to the heart of what we have to do on a daily basis, and is updated almost constantly to reflect a deeper understanding of the system and when things change, whereas formal documentation seems to be missed and skipped over.
Thank god for Wikis.
That's Twiki. (Which you can find by consulting the Wikipedia!)
One man's -1 Flamebait is another man's +5 Funny.
I totally agree with the parent post - wiki is good for internal use, maybe sharing company information, etc. But as soon as you turn it to the global audience with the intention of being a general information source, it becomes a worse information reference than any random web page out there. In fact, it might be worse, because random web pages that talk about things like "astronauts never walked on the moon", etc., aren't culled together and presented as fact the way that wiki presents all information. It's been shown repeatedly that there is little to no validation of real-world wiki information. I've read several stories (some here on /.) about people making totally bogus wiki entries that other people support.
Don't get me wrong, I think wiki has it's place, but experience indicates that it should not serve as a generic information source for the general population. At least, not in it's current form. If they hired a squadron of editors and fact checkers, things might be better, but that's not how wiki is supposed to work...
While replacing Notes with a standards-based environment is a step in the right direction, mark up in Wikiland really sucks.
IMHO, the way to go is to combine the writableness of wikis with a reasonable WYSIWYG editor. The "do I use three brackets here or only two" issues with wikis are just too annoying.
The whole idea of Wiki is based on eastern religion concepts. Personally I find that a little unsettling.
What?!! I hope this is a joke.
I've heard Ward Cunningham give a talk on how he came up with Wikis and it didn't have anything to do with Hinduism or Buddhism, or any other eastern religion that I am aware of. As I recall the inspiration was Apple's Hypercard - he wanted something like that for the web. He got the name wiki from the name on he Hawaiian bus/taxis which are called 'wiki-wiki' which apparently means 'fast'.
So I suppose if Hawaii is a bastian of 'Eastern Religion' then there could be some slight connection, but your reason for not liking wikis is bizarre.
Notes has had three - count 'em, 3 - major releases since that stuff was put up there, and many, if not all of the points it makes have been addressed. Notes is still one of the best platforms around for collaboration, for development of ad-hoc applications involving sharing information among teams and for publishing to the web. Notes/Domino continues to have just as much market share as Outlook/Exchange - and in fact you can even use Outlook as a client to a Domino back-end server.
Also, it continues to evolve - the next release, number 7, is in beta now. Customers' investment in applications developed under previous releases is preserved as well as ever (not something Microsoft can claim to do), and there's a roadmap that takes it towards a bright new future in the shape of the IBM Workplace.
There are wiki's that deal with this. We use JSPWiki on our intranet; it is a std. servlet webapp. The next version should support authorization, but even without it: I put the webapp behind a mandatory browser client certificate authentication (you can only access it through https, and everyone on the intranet has a certificate). Then with a one-line modification the Edit.jsp is only accessible to people that have a certain role (i.e. a small group of people responsible for the content), but everyone can read.
Versions are tracked in RCS, so any mistakes can be reversed. Also the client IP addresses are logged, and internally it is known who has which IP address. So any of your questions can be answered satisfactorily.
Also it has templates to apply some corporate style. Your mission critical internal product/project, in a large bank, uses it for all important documentation.
You're right in that business critical documentation should be owned and edited by only a small team. Making this documentation available to a wider audience is where a Wiki comes to the fore.
I've been running a Wiki in our department at work now for a couple of months. It was slow to start with, but people are starting to catch on now. Find a better way to do something? Add it to the Wiki. Know where all the spare printer paper is kept? Add it to the Wiki. Know the location on the network drive where the crucial licence agreements are kept? Add it to the Wiki. The list just keeps going on.
Wikis are great for sharing knowledge. Like any knowledge sharing initiative they require a knowledge champion to oversee new additions, assist users having problems and generally tidying up. They are a great collaborative tool when you have everyone's buy in. A real leveller in the workplace too. The newest temp can correct the managing director - anonymously if needs be.
Brought to you by the author of such childrens' classics as "Some Kittens can Fly!" and "All Dogs go to Hell."
What other kinds of metadata do you have in mind?
Quickly developing documentation in an environment where a large number of users collectively know everything that needs to be known, but it is not exactly clear who knows what, and no single user knows exactly where to begin with documenting what they know. The wiki helps in this situation by (1) being a central depository of knowledge (2) directing creativity: you don't know what other people might find useful of your store of knowledge, but then someone else starts writing about it. (3) killing self-consciousness over style: the wiki is inherently inconsistent in style, without a clear starting point or index. This has its drawbacks, but also has the advantage that new contributions can be written without regard to the grand scheme of things. I think the wiki model is great in the size range where the user community is too large to efficiently shout across to the next cubicle to the answer for your question, but too small to cost-effectively document everything in some formal fashion.
Theoretically, wikis are best used when everyone has a different piece of the pie and you're trying to put it all together. I know something about implementing module X; maybe another department knows something about implementing module Y; now we have to get X to talk to Y, here's what we know about both. It's meant to be a common repository, best used for things that change in a hurry. ("hurry" is entirely subjective -- three times a week might be fast)
A message board works for this purpose, except it's chronological, which has its advantages and disadvantages. A regular website is too static and would be messier than a wiki.
Of course, you can get creative with wikis... so far I'm trying to introduce it as an open-ended creative game, and a community journal that's admin-monitored.
The wikipedia doesn't necessarily change all that much, but it benefits from all internet users being theoretically able to add their knowledge into the repository.
-Rob
Marriage doesn't have to suck!
this stuff exists in every field, not just white collar office work
this is me, 30 years ago, talking to my boss, farmer smith (no lie, his name really is smith)
"yo, check this stuff out! alternate energy, cool stuff! You get free electricity, you get more from your crops, keep your cash, don't ship it to bigagco! Composting! Methane digesters! solar PV panels!," and etc etc
PHB farmer smith to me -> "dumbass hippie, if that stuff was so good, why aren't THEY doing it, huh? Huh? huh? Now get back to work...."
Flash fast forward to NOW, back working on BIGFARM, INC
This farm I'm on has three WHOPPER HUMONGOUS composting barns, designed for commercial scale composting of chicken litter. Not only is it better for the fields, but now with a big hammermill and some slick packaging, he can sell this stuff for a nice premium to upscale landscapers, and etc. Then, just last night joe farmer boss here gives me his used industry magazines, so I am checking them out in the executive library, cruise to the classifieds, always a interesting place to look... what do I see? BUY THESE SOLAR PANELS, RUN YOUR FARM ON THEM, PUMP WATER, RUN THE LIGHTS, RUN THE FANS! and etc. Next page ACME GIANT WINDMILL GENERATORS 4 SALE! TASTES GREAT, LESS FILLING! FREE ELECTROJUICE! and etc....Next page GROW ALTERNATIVE CROPS IN THESE SOLAR GREENHOUSES, EXPAND YOUR MARKET..."
on and on, amazing. The stuff I was pushing so long ago has hit mainstream with the dudes who resisted it the most, who made a career out of complaining and working hard instead of smart, because "they weren't doing it".
Ever like to just SLAP this "they" guy??
PHB don't believe it until their peers are doing it. Whether it's a white collar CEO at the golf course bragging on his new technology he just got, or a stained-collar "boss of the fields", or any place in between,it's a catch 22, usually it takes one oddball "boss" action dood with serious cred in their field to break the ice, THEN it might happen. The problem is to find the oddball willing to pony up the chutzpah and the cash to make the plunge. Sometimes it takes a LONG time though...
but ya, names.....best advice is cool it on the weird names, PHBs don't get weird names unless THEY think of them.