Flex 2.0: Reopening a Tree after updating the dataProvider

So, I’m completely stoked! I’ve figured out something that I think might actually be useful to the world in Flex! If you’ve worked with trees before, they’re fun except when you have to update their dataProvider. Then it’s not so fun because it collapses the tree and does not reopen it. Well, my friends, now it will. Check out this lil snippet of code. Copy it, paste it into FlexBuilder and press “Run”.

The two key elements of the tree are the openItems property and the render event. When used in conjuction with a boolean flag, you’re all set for keeping your tree open. Enjoy!

To see how trees normally act when changing dataProviders, delete the render event from the tree tag.

<?xml version=”1.0″ encoding=”utf-8″?>
<mx:Application xmlns:mx=”http://www.adobe.com/2006/mxml” layout=”vertical” creationComplete=”initFunc()”>
<mx:Script>
<![CDATA[
[Bindable]
public var tempOpen:Object = new Object();
[Bindable]
public var refreshSO:Boolean = false;

[Bindable]
public var secondObject:Object = new Object();
[Bindable]
public var tempObject:Object = new Object();
[Bindable]
public var tempObject1:Object = new Object();
[Bindable]
public var tempObject2:Object = new Object();
[Bindable]
public var currentDP:String = “tempObject”;

private function initFunc():void
{

tempObject = new Object();
tempObject.path = “somepathvalue”+2;
tempObject.label = “Node”+2;
tempObject.componentType = “Type”+2;
tempObject.children = new Array();
tempObject1.label = “test3”;
tempObject1.children = new Array();
tempObject2.label = “test4”;
tempObject1.children[0] = tempObject2;
tempObject.children[0] = tempObject1;
secondObject = tempObject;

}

public function switchDP():void
{
tempOpen = testTree.openItems;
refreshSO = true;
if (currentDP == “tempObject”)
{
currentDP = “secondObject”;
testTree.dataProvider = secondObject;
}
else
{
currentDP = “tempObject”;
testTree.dataProvider = tempObject;
}
}

public function renderFunc():void
{
if (refreshSO)
{
refreshSO = false;
testTree.openItems = tempOpen;
}
}
]]>
</mx:Script>
<mx:Tree id=”testTree” render=”renderFunc()” width=”250″ dataProvider=”{tempObject}” labelField=”label” />
<mx:Button label=”Switch DP” click=”switchDP()”/>
</mx:Application>

FlexArch

So, I was really hoping my next post would be a Flex 2 "hey check out this cool thing I made" post, but the cool thing hasn't quite been made yet. It's in the works, but still has a way to go.

In the meantime, you'll notice the link up top of this post. The link is for the FlexArch wiki. What is FlexArch? Well, it's a wiki where people can come talk and share code/experiences of creating new architectures for the Flex 2 platform. Flex is cool and the stuff we're doing with it in eBay is cool. If you want to learn how to create your own framework and API in Flex, then hopefully that will be the place to learn it. If you've already created your own framework/API in Flex 2, then you definitely need to go there and share your knowledge.

User Optimization

Take a look at this.

How sad that must be for the peeps in the search groups at MSN and Yahoo. You can just hear the announcement now. “So, team, we appreciate your hard work but, um, we’re going down a different path towards product acceptance. Some may call it bribing, but we prefer to call it ‘User Optimization’.”

For those nerdy couple out there in the valley, here’s a perfect date for tonight.

Library 1.5 (No, not 2.0 quite yet)

A couple of American professors did a new study on auction bidding behavior. The data used was collected from a Korea auction site and the auction style is different than eBay’s, but it’s an interesting read nonetheless.

While the data used in the study was all publicly available data, the neat thing is that the data was provided to the professors by the auction company. This helped the professors by letting them jumpstart into the nitty-gritty, rather than wasting time trying to collect data.

All the megaNet companies (eBay, Google, Yahoo!, Amazon) have tons of this data. Being walled communities, privacy concerns, etc., yada-yada, they keep this information under lock and key in some dark closet. (Not really, because internal employees must be analyzing the hell out of the data, but we’re talking about the view from outside the company.) This leaves researchers/professors to fend for themselves in data collecting. Knowing how uppity sites are about their data, they probably wouldn’t take too kindly to researchers “collecting” what the company’s consider their data and would probably urge the researchers to stop. So, what are the academics to do?

It’s time we bring a bit of the Old World into the New World. When you wanted to (or were forced to, I should say) do research for a school assignment when you were younger, what did you do? You went to the library.

In the library, there were sections that had reference books that never left the building. You were free to use them all you wanted while at the library, but you couldn’t take them with you. This was a hassle because you had to leave your house, go to the library and look like a nerd. Sometimes though, things worked out and you’d find or bring a friend and things would move faster as you split up tasks. Soon enough, without trying, you’d be having fun and have a better project because of the interaction. If needed, you could copy the pages of info you needed and take that to go with you so you could continue the research until the wee hours of morning.

What if these megaNet companies created their own in-house libraries? Places where academia could come and share a common space and perform research on this fat collection of data.

Before you all go off on a rant about the infeasibility to do such things due to privacy issues, corporate espionage, etc, hear me out. Let’s tackle the obvious issues and agree on solutions.

The workspace – Lots of talking goes on at companies, not to mention other visible evidence of what’s coming but not out yet. Besides, the obvious NDA, you could put all the academia in a single room. This would prevent wandering eyes, fly on the wall eavesdropping, etc. I’m not saying the rooms have to be windowless, single door jail cells, just setup where nothing big and secretive is easily viewed.
The Information – The data these peeps will be after is full of personal information. We can’t possibly allow them access to this stuff and not be sued. Sure we can. We can put a DBA, network security and SOX compliance cop in the room with them. The DBA can be setting up temp tables and views into whatever data the researchers want, while carefully stripping personal data. The network security person can be setting up shared drives for the researchers and monitoring their net usage. The SOX cop can insure all’s okay from the legal standpoint. (Sure, this isn’t really SOX related, but SOX peeps are good at freaking out about the smallest bit of security and info breaching, so they’re a good fit.)
The Computers & Networks – The biggest fear is that these researchers are not going to be able to control themselves and start emailing troves of data out of the company and into the public. No problem. Have two networks in the room: one with access to the corporate network (that the employees are monitoring) and one with a direct connect to the internet only. This way, the researcher can query like mad on the corporate computer and then just manually type his results to the other computer.

Now, each library would be different. Some would be more aesthetically pleasing, while another more intellectually pleasing. Each library would in essence be a miniature version of the host company themselves.

Eventually, the companies would see the good work these researchers are doing for their line of business. They would ask the researchers to assist on projects and begin interacting with employees. Heck, I’m sure some companies will even begin to hire the researchers.

The point is that the data we’re holing up needs to come out somehow. I can think of no better way than having the academia go in there and help us understand what we do on these sites we practically live on. I know I’m curious, aren’t you?

Steve Jobs Aura

I’ve been watching Steve Jobs keynotes for years now. I’ve marveled at his ability to ahh and wow the audience during his keynotes. I’m not one for public talking and therefore, it’s nice to admire those that do it well.

For years, I’ve wanted to see the man in action. I’ve heard stories of how he enthralls the room, of how all attendees are sucked into the Steve Jobs reality vortex and transported to Jobsian Nirvana for the 90 minute talk. I wanted to take this little trip with him just once. Today, I finally did.

My impression: It ain’t all that. Now, before all the members of the Steve Jobs Fan Club jump all over me, hear me out. I too am a member, remember? I think the man is a genius! I love the output of both of his companies, Apple and Pixar. However, the Keynote wasn’t as hypnotic as I thought it would be.

Now, granted, I had two distractions. One the guy in front of me who had to keep standing up to take pictures. It wouldn’t have been too bad if each shot didn’t take 10 minutes to take. Then there was the idiot behind me who couldn’t be bothered to either turn down his cell phone’s ringer or just turn it off. You’d think after one call, he’d do something about it. No, instead he was too busy feeling important and wanted, “I’m in the keynote, can you just call back later? [hang up] Geeze, some people.” Yeah, buddy, some people.

Now, without those two distractions, would I have been mystified? I doubt it. Before I rag on Steve, let me comment on his better points:

1. He can relate to the common man. He makes you think he’s just an ordinary schmoe who just happened to be picked to talk about all this new “stuff”. He even calls it “stuff” too, not some technical term, just like Joe Neighbor would call it “stuff”.

2. He’s relaxed in front of the rabid Mac-fans, press, VIPs and countless cameras. I’ve seen very few people who seem generally relaxed in front of crowds. Watching him, you sort of forget how hard it is to public speak, until some other speaker comes on during the show, then it’s obvious.

3. He’s humble…now. I know that wasn’t always the case, but the Steve Jobs of today (literally) gave all the credit for these brilliant products to the engineers that made them a reality. He even made them stand so they could receive their proper accolades from the crowd. And boy did we heap it on them. =) Here’s a little more even: Great job, guys! You rock!

Okay, so there’s some good points for you; Now, onto the criticisms. A lot of you people will think the following, “Well, of course, he’s human, you know.” But that’s my precise point, Steve is not supposed to be human during a keynote, he’s the world’s closest thing to a demi-god to his worshippers in attendance.

1. You don’t know when to clap. A good speaker leads you in the interaction. You should know when to clap and know when you shouldn’t but feel the need to do it anyways. Today’s biggest awkward clap moment was during the .Mac talk. He said, “I’m happy to announce that we now have 1 million subscribers.” He paused…which I suppose was a cue for us to clap so one or two people did. However, since the response wasn’t enthusiastic, he quickly added, “And we expect continued growth in the future.” Another pause. By this time, we all had a clue and applauded. It was just a weird moment and there were several of those.

2. He misspeaks often. The funniest instance of this was when he said “Webshite” instead of “Website”. =) He also seems to get lost in thought sometimes. He never loses focus, but you can tell he tripped over a word or phrase and has to find his way back.

3. The “stuff” is the true magic. What is captivating about his keynotes are the demos and the ads. Now, I know he has a lot of input into those things, so you could say that’s part of his charm. Not really though, it’s the material that knocks your socks off. Whether the material is a new piece of hardware, software or advertisement, Apple has solid “Oh I gotta have that products.” Heck, I even get emotionally misty-eyed during the iLife demos because it usually deals with family themes and I’m a family man.

There you have it. This newbie’s impression of his first Steve Jobs keynote. Maybe he was just off this year. Don’t worry, I’ll give him another chance in June. I’m going to try to make it to the WWDC! =)

Big Plastic’s Online Challenger

I read this piece the other day. It’s about the new payment method set out to kill credit cards. I’m thinking, what? PayPal?

(Now, I am a bit biased because I work for eBay and PayPal is one of our companies. However, I’ve been using paypal for years, whereas I’ve only been at eBay for a little more than a month. In fact, I just had a run in with the patheticness of paper checks and the drudgery it entails. If everyone used paypal [employers, banks, rental offices], life would be easy.)

The article isn’t about PayPal though. It’s about this new fandangled Bill Me Later payment plan. Quick and dirty: Old Credit Card playa tires of the game. (Hate the game, not the playa!) He starts an alternative to credit cards for online payments. With just you birthday, last 4 digits of you social security number, and address, they approve you for the purchase amount. You then receive a bill in the mail and pay at your leisure, however you see fit.

I’m thinking, “Big deal. What’s so special about this?” Those that use it, love it, and tend to spend more. It’s that tend to spend more part retailers like. Plus, these guys charge the merchants 1.5% vs. credit cards 2%. It’s pretty much a no brainer for businesses. Business is all about 2 things: Making money and keeping as much of it as you can.

There’s an article I read in HBR awhile back. It said that change in conditions creates a change in productivity. The change could be for the better or for the worse, that didn’t matter. Just that fact that something changed spurred activity. I think that’s what’s going on here. To quote one of the users, “If you have good credit, you have got to try Bill Me Later. I have quite a few credit cards, and every time I use it(sic) over the Internet I am afraid someone is going to steal my account numbers and use my credit line fraudulently. But with the Bill Me Later option, I feel secure.” Now, I’m missing something here. Those same theives who are after her credit card numbers aren’t after this info? Heck, I’m no expert but with one credit card number stolen that card can be maxed. With all this info stolen, unlimited purchases can be made in your name. Yeah, it sounds *much* safer to me.

What about fraudulent activity though? To quote Bill Me Later, “Does Bill Me Later® protect me from unauthorized charges? Yes, Bill Me Later® provides ‘zero fraud liability’ protection; the same protection provided by most major credit cards. This means you are not responsible for unauthorized charges.” Therefore, even if that girl’s credit card number was stolen, she wouldn’t be responsible. Once again, what’s the point?

People are funny in how they don’t think things though. You place a new thought/method in front of them, and they think, “Oh, this is new. It must be better.”

My biggest gripe with Bill Me Later is that it’s one way. From what I can tell, it’s not two way. In other words, they’re taking the beauty of online, instantaneous payment processing and taking us back in time to before credit cards where only in-store credit existed. I buy something online and the paper trail begins. One of my favorite quotes from the article is from Forrester analyst Sucharita Mulpuru: “It has the potential to open online retail to a whole new segment of customers that wouldn’t have shopped otherwise.” Like who? My grandparents (or sadly enough, my parents who fear the stolen credit card thievery too). No offense, but literally, that segment is a dying breed. Today’s youth couldn’t be bothered about putting every bit of information online, much less a stinkin’ credit card number.

This company is growing and will most likely be bought for lots of cash. Really though, I don’t think they have a lasting business model. Here’s why:

– Who wants a new “credit line” for every single purchase made? (i.e. every $20 order) Hence, this will be a big purchase option only.
– How long can people be fooled? Sure, it’s a new way, but eventually, people have to realize it’s no safer than Credit Cards.
– One way only? Why use a service like this that’s only one way, when PayPal lets you send AND receive money.
– But customers spend more! That’s only because of the “90 day no payment” for purchases over $250. That’s a retail ploy, not a lasting business model.

Well, those are my thoughts. Now, when someone runs up to you and says, “Hey, I just heard of this cool feature called Bill Me Later.” You can tell them, “Thanks, but no thanks. I prefer Bill Me Now, i.e. PayPal.”

eBay’s Offline Brand

Tiffany has the blue box, Nordstrom has the bags, Amazon has the smiley boxes and eBay has? Nuttin’.

I was walking the halls of eBay this morning and noticed a fellow employee walking with her Nordstrom bag, advertising for all to see where she shops.

eBay doesn’t have that. We have absolutely friggin’ nothing. How are we going to expand our offline presence, when we have nothing to offer?

Now, it would hurt our bottom line to provide anything to the sellers/buyers, i.e. bags, boxes, etc. However, the average seller doesn’t have a world-class marketing department to help it design something as important as that, but eBay does.

Why not offer help where we can? We can present, display, offer for download, etc. the designs for tons of these products (boxes, cards, brochures, bags, etc.) These could all be unified in appearance, but still leave room for personalization by the seller. The seller could then take the product to a manufacturer/printer and buy the supplies of their choice.

Imagine the smiles of pleasure that would appear on people’s faces when they looked on their porch or into their mail boxes and saw something wrapped up in eBay branded materials. They’ll immediately know it’s something good and something they wanted.

I think there’s an opportunity here that eBay is squandering.

Google’s Gains from AOL

Everyone keeps talking about how bad Google made out in the AOL deal, but I think they’re missing some key points. Granted most of my points and opinions are derived from the NY Times article. Regardless, here are my thoughts.

Google has agreed to give AOL ads special placement on its site, something it has not done before. Until now, Google prided itself on its auction system for ads, which treated small businesses on an equal footing with its largest customers.

It doesn’t say that others can’t follow in AOL’s footsteps. Knowing Google, this will become an option for anyone. Kinda like eBay’s ” Promote Your Listing on eBay”. Give us some more cash, and we’ll help it stand out. However, I hardly call the bottom right hand corner as “special” placement.

They will also carry AOL’s logo, the first time Google has agreed to place graphic ads on its search result pages.

They probably wanted to try this on a global scale anyway, as an experiment to see how it works out. There’s nothing wrong with making a little money with their experiment.

Google will also provide technical assistance so AOL can create Web pages that will appear more prominently in the search results list.

The flip side is that Google is then going to have a cached copy of every piece of content the TW empire has ever created. Not a bad deal considering they only have to offer up advice that is freely available. I can only imagine that in the days to come, we’ll find out that the technical assistance wasn’t anything special. You can picture the discussion now between Dick and Eric:

Dick: “I want you guys to also help us show up in your results more. I know we have relevant content, but it hardly shows up in searches.”

Eric: [Thinking to himself: Well, the information to help them is freely available on the internet, but if we help them, then we’ll be sure to have all their content in our DB and earn some brownie points.] “Sure, if that will help push the deal further, we’ll help you.”

Dick: [Sucker, we just got help that is worth untold millions]

Eric: [Sucker, we just scored points by offering a few entry-level SEOs.]

Google will also make a special effort to incorporate AOL video programming in its expanding video search section and it will feature links to AOL videos on the video search home page. These links will not be marked as advertising.

Easy access to some of the “best” (read: popular) content for free? How is this not good for the Google average user base? Remember, most of the population isn’t geeks. They read People and US magazine, and they like it! =)

An executive involved in the talks said that as recently as two weeks ago, Mr. Parsons told Microsoft executives that he preferred their bid. Still, that executive said, Microsoft had the impression that executives in the AOL unit preferred to work with Google. Yesterday, several AOL executives said that was true. A source close to Mr. Parsons said his only goal was to do the best deal for AOL’s future.

I think that Mr. Parsons non-stated stated stance was a bunch of crap. Dick probably said that to hopefully garner what he wanted from Google, which furthered “his only goal”. Of course AOL preferred Google, Microsoft was their enemy for so long. It’s hard to put that aside. “Yeah, I know we tried to kill you once, but my have we told you lately how beautiful you look?” I don’t think so.

AOL executives are attracted to the idea of offering marketers a full range of Internet advertisements, from splashy ads on the home page of AOL.com to text ads.

Once again, Google gets first hand view of “beefier” ads and the results they garner on a huge scale. I think they’re hoping to justify text ads. “We’ve seen the stats between flash ads, image ads, and text ads. There is no benefit, and actually a hindrance, to using non-text ads.” Or if they find out the opposite then it’s “Oh crap, banner ads do work better than text ads. Let’s use AOL to figure out how best to technically work them out.” Either way, they win.

eBay!

We’ll, it’s been a few weeks since I’ve started at eBay. I’m loving it so far. Coming from a 5 year stint at a mortgage company, eBay is definitely a breath of fresh air.

While I admit, I’m fascinated with Google as much as the next person, I think eBay’s not getting enough press. I think it’s because of what Batelle said: Experimenting.

I know I’m ready to step up and help out. It’s time to show Google what’s up. (Although, they do got free food. Not much I can do about that one though.)