Vista's XPS Viewer needs IE as default browser

This is annoying, I went to open an XPS document that someone at Microsoft kindly sent me in request to a query I had. A quick Google showed me that I should be able to open it with Vista's built-in XPS Viewer. However when I try to, I find it opens Mozilla Firefox with this message:

The only problem is that if I hit OK, it opens another tab in Firefox with the same popup, ad infinitum.

Making IE my default browser solved the problem, but if the darn things is dependent upon IE then it should just try opening in it in IE, regardless of what my default browser is, grrrr ... I checked for a Firefox add-in, but couldn't find one, so I ended up making IE my default browser for the 2 minutes it took to open and print the document.

In case you're interested I develop cross-browser apps so I need multiple browsers on my PC, and I prefer to use Firefox for random links I open because of the excellent NoScript add-in, which prevents my PC getting reamed by dodgy code on the websites I visit (which can sometimes happen on even the most reputable sites).

Rob Walling's developer archetypes

I've mentioned Rob Walling's developer archetypes before, but my first week in my new position has brought home to me some of how I fall across those archetypes (and I'm egotistical enough to believe it is of interest to you). This is how he sums them up:

The archetypes are:

• Trainer/Author -
  spends the majority of his/her time teaching, training, writing articles and books, and otherwise helping others learn how to program.
• Coder - a hard-core developer. Into design patterns, the next cool and experimental language constructs, and talking about web service proxy generators.
• Lead - excellent organization skills, driven to make projects succeed, and skilled at leading others.
• Technologist - into all the new applications; would rather integrate than write code.

I mulled about this myself, but I didn't like the answers I got, but I know that's never a good reason to ignore something. This last week, it all came together for me. I'm in a senior developer position - not team lead, not project manager, not even consultant. Of course a fair bit of the week was spent settling in (getting the right keyboard for instance), but I found that by the end of the week I've done exactly four new lines of code, amended about 30 lines of code, re-designed 9 web page wireframes and yet feel valuable, energised and eager to go to work each day.

This settled an internal argument I'd been having about Coder vs. Technologist. I am definitely more of a Technologist than a Coder, but I'm more of a Coder than anything else.

30%
Coder

40%
Technologist

20%
Lead

10%
Trainer/Author

The part of my week that I'm most proud about? Getting a mental picture of how the whole company operates, particularly with regards to software development and deployment. I now understand how the whole hangs together - yet I'm sure a pure Coder would not be interested in that, it's more of a sign of a Technologist/Integrator. In any case it justifies for me the decision to go back to a development role, especially in light of Rob's recent post about why good developers re promoted into unhappiness. I'm far happier now than I was when all I ever got to see was Visio network diagrams, the occasional test script and tons of paperwork, meetings and decisions about what others should do.

Computers not so boring after all ...

In his Wired article Dream Machines, Will Wright (creator of The Sims) makes an interesting point about the difference between the traditional view of computers and the part they really play in our lives:

“Think of it this way: Most technologies can be seen as an enhancement of some part of our bodies (car/legs, house/skin, TV/senses). From the start, computers have been understood as an extension of the human brain; the first computers were referred to as mechanical brains and analytical engines. We saw their primary value as automated number crunchers that far exceeded our own meager abilities.

But the Internet has morphed what we used to think of as a fancy calculator into a fancy telephone with email, chat groups, IM, and blogs. It turns out that we don't use computers to enhance our math skills - we use them to expand our people skills.”

That's a really interesting point given that universities are still focusing on testing maths skills in computer courses. Are young IT graduates getting the training they really need to understand the place computers play in the modern world?

Have they been taught psychology, usability, graphic design, communications? Do they have any idea at all about how to make not just a technically excellent product, but how to answer real human needs? Clearly this is at the heart of recent successes in Web companies - MySpace, Flickr, digg and del.icio.us depend upon the social aspects of the technology and are (in some ways) clearly very simple.

More to the point, are modern IT organisations looking for the right people skills in the staff they hire? Are the job descriptions analyst/programmer, systems architect, DBA still meaningful? Or are we perhaps going to see a great divide between those who understand people and creative thought (the valuable ones), and those who fulfil the role of mechanics and street sweepers (the ones we outsource to the lowest bidder) in our new world?