![]() I’ve literally been in the exact same place, trying to determine which team collaboration tool is best for our company. You can read it online or download a free PDF here: Shape Up: Stop Running in Circles and Ship Work that Matters.If you are looking to make a decision between Basecamp and, you’ve come to the right place. Haven’t heard of “shaping” or “betting”? All the details about how we work are in the book. Then, after we validated the approach, we were able to shape a subsequent project with clearer expectations and build the feature to completion in another cycle. They had a roughly shaped concept but lots of room for R&D work to figure out how to render the chart and store its history. For the first cycle, the team wasn’t expected to ship. We had never built the kind of high fidelity interactions required to drag dots on the hill, and there were lots of open questions about the data model. That’s how we handled Hill Charts in Basecamp 3. Then if that works out, shape a project with clearer expectations and a hard bet. Bet time on exploratory work in the new area to firm up the ground. In that case, draw a boundary between the part of the app that has a settled architecture and the new area that’s unsettled. Sometimes you need to do build a feature totally unlike anything you’ve done before or with unfamiliar technology. This split between R&D and production mode is also useful for existing products. But we didn’t commit to any specific work further than six weeks ahead. We knew it would take multiple cycles to build BC3 - maybe a year’s worth or more. We still only made commitments one cycle at a time. Those features weren’t anywhere near complete enough to ship, but the stubbed versions gave him confidence that the architecture would accommodate all the functionality we hoped to build later. Extremely bare bones versions of the message board, comments, and to-do features validated the architecture. In the case of Basecamp 3, David (co-founder and CTO) started by doing R&D work to define the access model and how data of many different kinds would belong to one project versus another. Instead of building things half-way like in R&D mode, the team is expected to build a fully working version and deploy it by the end of the cycle. We don’t know if we’ll like a new feature or if we’ll include it in the final cut of the product, but we can define our appetite for it, shape it, bet time on it, and give it to a team. All the detailed Shape Up methods apply at this point. What’s different is now the architecture is settled and the ground is firm, so we can make surer bets. There are still lots of unknowns and unbuilt features in production mode. Once they do, we can shift to production mode. It can take the skunkworks team a few cycles of work before they get to this point. It’s easier to see where new features will go and what they will be built upon. With the key pieces of the architecture in place, constraints now exist for future work. There are lots of deep judgement calls to make and no existing code or interface constraints to guide their efforts.Įventually the R&D team gets to a point where they’re willing to “pour concrete” on the fundamentals. That’s why the team needs to be small and senior. ![]() They’ll shape an approach, spike it out, learn something, and try something else. The R&D team integrates shaping and building in a blurry mix within the time box we’ve allocated. But for a new product, you need to get through this experimental phase to arrive at the basic design. That would be very unhealthy in production work. It’s common to pursue one approach for a couple weeks, realize it’s not working, scrap everything, and then try something else. (The Pragmatic Programmers call this “firing tracer bullets.”) Instead of building features to completion, they build just enough to verify that the product hangs together and the architecture accommodates the functionality we’ll need. An experienced designer/programmer team will pair together skunkworks style to work out the basics of the overall architecture and some key interface elements. Instead of shaping and betting on a specific feature idea, we bet a block of time (a six-week cycle) on exploratory work with an extremely rough list of potential features. We call them “R&D mode” and “production mode.” There are two phases of work when you start a new product. We’re working on a new product right now, and we’re following the same approach we used to build Basecamp 3 and Basecamp 2 before it. There’s a new appendix in the book now to answer this question: How to Begin to Shape Up: New versus existing products. People in my book club love all the principles, but they had one question: How did they build Basecamp 3 doing this? It seems like all the practices are for adding features to an existing product. Here’s a common question that’s coming up about Shape Up, our new book on product development:
0 Comments
![]() While the Decepticons were in the midst of testing their new intergalactic " space bridge" transport system, Reflector took part in two battles with the Autobots when the heroic robots tried to interfere with the test run. More than Meets the Eye, Part 3 Numerous robots sharing Reflector's design, who existed in addition to the core trio, also took part in these activities. More than Meets the Eye, Part 2 Reflector participated in the battle royale with the Autobots shortly before the Decepticons' failed attempt at returning to Cybertron aboard a new space cruiser. Reflector later battled the Autobot forces on an offshore oil rig, More than Meets the Eye, Part 1 and joined in the Decepticons' attack on Sherman Dam. More than Meets the Eye, Part 1Īnything you need reflected? I (we?) gotcha covered. Reflector dispensed a Polaroid photograph of the truck that had caught their attention, and Thundercracker reported the intruder to Megatron as a possible Autobot (which it wasn't). Thundercracker then spotted something off in the distance, and Reflector transformed to camera mode so that Thundercracker could use him to zoom in on the mystery object. As they surveyed the desert landscape, Reflector expressed his disbelief that the Autobots had also survived the crash. Withdrawing from the Ark, the Decepticons immediately set about constructing a temporary base for themselves, and Reflector and Thundercracker were assigned to patrol the perimeter. When the Ark crashed on Earth, Reflector was entombed in stasis with the other Transformers and awoke with the other Decepticons in 1984. Reflector was among the warriors who accompanied Megatron aboard the Decepticons' space cruiser during its assault on the Autobots' Ark four million years ago. Dinobots"), Mário Monjardim (Portuguese), Francisco José (Portuguese, "Roll for It"), Orlando Drummond (Portuguese, "Divide and Conquer"), Carlos Seidl (Portuguese, "Autobot Spike"), Jacques Ferrière (European French), Francis Lax & Georges Atlas (European French, "Divide and Conquer") 2.1 Transformers: Beast Wars Transmetals (N64)įiction Generation 1 cartoon continuity The Transformers cartoon Voice actor: Chris Latta (English), Yoku Shioya (Japanese), Keiichi Nanba (Japanese, "Fire in the Sky"), Wang Wèi (Chinese), Ulrich Bernsdorff (German), Gerd Wiedenhofen (German, Generation 2, "More than Meets the Eye, Part 1"), Willy Schäfer (German, Generation 2, "S.O.S. ![]() 1.10.2 War for Cybertron Trilogy cartoon.1.10.1 War for Cybertron Trilogy marketing material.1.10 War for Cybertron Trilogy continuity. ![]()
Substantial tool for administrative workįree PDF Editor is a good alternative to paid word processing programs as it allows you to write and save documents as PDFs. These settings will be stored at the same time your document gets saved or when you click Create PDF. Should you need to repeat the same definitions, layouts, and modes for several documents, the program saves these into one XML file with the extension. Modes include Full Screen, Use Thumbs, Use Outlines, and Use None. Page modes are different from the page layouts as it modifies how you view the document on your screen. As for the layout, the program offers the following: Single Page, One Column, Two Colum Left/Right. You will find that the default settings are set to A4 paper size with 210 x 297 mm. In addition to formatting the file properties, you can define a page’s width, height, and margins. Under these are the creation date, modify data, and program used to create the file. The Document Options tool allows you to add the title, subject, and author of the document. In addition to the Insert Text tool, Free PDF Editor allows you to add media, change the font size, and format the file. The page is synonymous with a canvas in that you will create the layout from scratch. It appears like the blank page in MS Word but without the text cursor. At launch, the window is taken up by a blank page. Providing small and limited icons provides more space for the workspace. Another note to make regarding the program’s layout is that the icons are small Free PDF Editor uses 16x16 icons while its competing word to PDF processor, Microsoft Word, uses 96x96 pixels. The program makes up for this allowing your cursor to hover over the tool to display the tool’s name. Other word processing programs use this icon to denote Justify Text. For example, the Insert Text icon appears as several parallel lines. They appear similar to the ones offered by word processing programs but they’re not as straightforward. The toolbar, on the other hand, displays 24 tools. You will see that the menu bar offers standard menu options, namely: File, Insert, Edit, Page, Help. The main window of Free PDF Editor is made up of three parts: menu bar, toolbar, and workspace or viewing window. ![]() It is also capable of inserting, resizing, and moving images and shapes onto the page. From the phrase ‘what you see is what you get,’ this WYSIWYG editor uses a specific printer configuration to simulate the appearance fonts and line breaks on the final pagination. The main draw of this program is that it enables you to see what the printout will look like while the document is being created. ![]() At less than 1 megabyte, this lightweight freeware can be run from its EXE file. Then you will need to upgrade to the Acrobat Pro Reader.Free PDF Editor by is a PDF writer and creator for Windows XP/Vista/7/10. However, if you need more advanced tools such as: If you have basic needs, like opening a PDF, signing the document, adding a stamp, or leaving comments on the document, then the free option is perfect for you. Pro? Depends on Your Needsīefore I can answer whether the free Adobe PDF Reader DC is good enough or if you should upgrade to Adobe Acrobat Pro, you have to understand your needs. The Windows installer program will take care of the rest and remove the software from your computer.
![]()
|
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |