• rTraction - a highly skilled, well-respected web development and online marketing firm that services many non-profits in the city
• Echidna Solutions – another great web development firm who has donated a lot of their time to efforts like Emerging Leaders
• Info-Tech Research Group – one of the top 10 IT research firms in the world, rated as the best IT research firm by Outsell (full disclosure: I work at ITRG)
• Resolution Interactive Media – a very talented group of web developers best known for their online training site built for LHSC, and highly interactive websites for several Ontario colleges
• Big Blue Bubble – a local video game development company, probably best known for Burn The Rope right now
• Antic Entertainment – local video game development company that has won awards for their game Junk Battles
• Start Communications – an Internet service provider, with their own network around downtown London, that customers have been raving about ever since the UBB debate flared up earlier this year
• Aaron McGowan – a well-respected, and very talented, freelance programmer that specializes in mobile apps and mobile websites
• Digital Extremes – a large video game developer that’s produced several blockbuster titles like BioShock, Unreal Tournament, Homefront and Dark Sector

And there are lots of others, most of which can be seen on TechAlliance’s Member Directory. For instance, I bet you didn’t know that DirectDial.com is owned by EK3 Technologies, which is based in London. I’m not going to sit here and boast about my company, Orpheum Hosting Solutions, but I do believe Orpheum’s providing a much needed service to freelancers and small business owners!

So really, I won’t sit here and listen to people complain about the lack of a tech industry in London. No, we’re not Santa Clara, California (in the heart of Silicon Valley). But that doesn’t mean there isn’t an industry to break into, or a need that’s going unserved. In fact, if you’re feeling frustrated with your attempts to find a job as a developer or networking professional, London has enough small businesses that the right business plan and marketing will get you the opportunity to do plenty of work. I used to freelance and got the opportunity to build computer networks from scratch for several businesses, and I knew a lot less then than I do now.

Here’s the video.

Click here to view the embedded video.

It’s a dismal state that must be corrected.

Canadians need choice. Canadians need freedom. Canadians need security. And most of all, when things get rough, Canadians need support. What they don’t need is a government that is so eager to put them in prison that they’re going to spend billions of dollars on new American-style superprisons. What Canadians don’t need is a government that seems hellbent on turning us into a warmongering nation, spending billions of dollars on jets without engines, and forgoing our previously well-known reputation for being peacekeepers. What Canada doesn’t need, or want, is to leave our neighbours and families out in the cold when they need our help the most.

It’s high time we stood up for the country we live in. Now is the time where we must look to the future and decide what we want this country to look like, to act like at home and around the world, and how we want to be seen amongst our peers. We have a very serious choice to make, and it can make or break this country.

In order to survive and thrive in the next 144 years, this nation has but one way forward. We need to invest in ourselves, in our communities,  and in the way of life we hold dear. That means making decisive, wise choices in how we spend our money, how we treat the future leaders of this land, and how we treat those that are suffering.

We need to invest in our children and grandchildren. Students need genuine help getting to and through school, and that’s why the Liberal Party’s platform introduced the Learning Passport, providing up to $1500 per year for students that get the grades, and deserve to get a post-secondary education.

That’s why the Liberal Party platform brings back the deal it signed with the provinces, that was killed by Stephen Harper and the Conservatives, ensuring each province has the ability to get the funding they need in order to train new early childhood educators, create more childcare spaces, and help parents out in the way they need to most.

Canadians should have the right to take the time off work you need to look after your parents without being penalized for it. That’s why they want to create a new Family Care Employment Insurance Benefit, so that caregivers take six months off work to care for gravely ill family members at home; and on top of that a new Family Care Tax Benefit worth up to $1,350 annually, to help low- and middle-income family caregivers manage the costs associated with looking after their parents.

And, of course, those who need the healthcare system should feel comfortable knowing that it will be there to take care of them thoroughly, efficiently, with the best care possible. The federal government has to continue to work with the provinces to make that a priority now and in the future.

We need to expand and enhance the Canada Pension Plan, before it starts having the same problems the U.S. Social Security Plan has. Canadians need to know the CPP will be there for them, and will make a meaningful impact on their retirement lifestyles. Canadians have also been clear that existing retirement saving methods aren’t enough. That’s why the Liberal Party has proposed a Secure Retirement Option – an enhancement to the CPP that’s voluntary, leaving you with the choice to participate or not, and not run by the banks.

We need to ensure that affordable housing is available, that we leave this country and planet cleaner than it was when we came into it, where service to your community is recognized and rewarded, and where the arts get just as much respect as our office workers, construction workers, and doctors do. Canadians need to know that the food on their table not only tastes great, but is good for them and won’t make them sick. And rural Canada, in all its forms, finally get the respect it deserves from the cities it feeds.

That’s the Canada you deserve. That’s the Canada I want to live in. Anything less is unacceptable.

And when we can afford it, we will reduce taxes. We will reduce personal income taxes. We will reduce business taxes. But we can’t go on running the country as if printing more money is the answer. This all has to be done responsibly and with a level head recognizing the situation for what it is, and the implications of where money comes from, and how it’s spent.

So join me in voting for a Canada we can all be proud of. Vote for your local Liberal candidate, and give them the mandate to turn this country around and into one that all Canadians can be proud of, and is once again respected on the world stage. Our livelihoods depend on it.

Nokia 6185, circa 2000

My first cell phone was a Nokia 6185. Heck, my second cell phone was a Nokia too. They both worked really well, always had good reception, rarely dropped a call. But that was 10 years ago. Since then I’ve gone through a couple of Motorola phones, two BlackBerry devices, and one Samsung. I’m currently using an LG phone and am seriously pondering my next move. An Android-based smartphone or HP’s new Pre 3 are the most likely candidates at this point.

Nokia’s Ancaster, Ontario-born CEO, Stephen Elop (his LinkedIn profile), knows full well that Nokia has lost its lustre. He says so in a strikingly honest, if long winded, memo released to Nokia employees three days ago. He speaks of a story about a burning oil platform (Symbian), and a man having to jump into the icy waters of the Atlantic Ocean in order to save himself. Nokia has leapt… but I fear they have jumped onto another platform that’s about to blow.

When I initially read the memo posted on Engadget, which has been verified as being the real thing, I first thought to myself, “Could they be striking a deal with HP? Wow, a Nokia phone with webOS? That would be a hell of a bombshell.” After watching HP’s press conference the other day where they unveiled the Veer, Pre 3 and TouchPad, I thought, “Wow… HP’s really letting the Palm guys go after it and make a killer product.” webOS looks terrific, the hardware looks great, and early builds of webOS 3.0 (as seen in various hands-on videos on the web) look pretty smooth already. Nokia + HP makes perfect sense. Android? Not so much.

In the memo, Mr. Elop says that Nokia’s employees will know more about the future of the company on February 11. That day was today. Imagine my surprise when I read that Nokia and Microsoft announced today that Nokia would be basing their future on Windows Phone 7. I was surprised, yet unsurprised. Mr. Elop is a former Microsoft executive… how predictable.

As a colleague of mine points out on the official Info-Tech Research Group blog, Windows Phone 7 is not exactly experiencing success. Poor sales, small developer ecosystem, and only five different devices available in Canada – two of which are available from a carrier consumers love to hate.

Nokia 6100, circa 2001

So it looks like Nokia wants to use hardware design credentials with Microsoft’s brand new software design practices (which, again, don’t seem to be winning over a lot of people). But wait… if someone like me – with almost no brand loyalty when it comes to cell phones – hasn’t owned a Nokia phone since I was 18 (with the exception of a 3390 for when I visit family overseas), what hardware design expertise does Nokia plan to leverage that will get people buy Nokia phones again?

Is it the expertise that’s brought us the current schizophrenic line of phones available today? The Nokia N8 is the only device that looks worth owning at this point, especially since all of the phones are based on Symbian (the burning platform). All the other phones look like they’ve been ripped-off inspired by BlackBerry, HTC and Motorola.

Wait… that’s it! People have accused Microsoft of stealing ideas from Apple and Linux for years. Nokia’s phones look like they’re Chinese knock-offs of the real deal. Maybe Microsoft and Nokia were meant to be after all?

As someone who speaks to vendors of high tech equipment, and consumers of the same high tech equipment, several times a week, I feel I can bring somewhat unique insight into the usage-based billing (UBB) debate happening across Canada. I don’t think I’ll say anything spectacularly special here, but looking at the issue from both the telecom side (including both the business and technology) and the consumer side yields some key things that need to be considered.

1. The CRTC is supposed to ensure a healthy level of competition amongst the industries it regulates. Moving from the current gateway access service (GAS) to only allowing smaller ISPs, essentially, to resell Bell’s existing packages at a 15% discount will easily put providers like TekSavvy and Primus out of business.
2. Bell and Rogers laid their respective infrastructures in my neighbourhood when it was built, 13 years ago. Given the inherent oligopoly, I’m certain both companies have gotten a decent ROI by now. There are a few homes with wireless antennae on the roofs, mine included, that I believe are intended to be used with Execulink however I don’t believe anyone is using wireless at the moment.
3. There have been no upgrades in my neighbourhood past the nodes since that time. In fact, Bell hasn’t upgraded anything other than laying down fibre and new DSLAMs in London in several years. The new Fibe service isn’t available in Kilworth or Komoka, and Bell can’t provide me with anything better than 6Mbps. And, I know from experience, that Bell throttles streaming video (legitimate or not) very harshly from 9am till 9pm (give or take an hour).
4. Rogers cannot provide me with anything faster than 15Mbps. The bandwidth cap on this plan is 80GB (it was 95GB until just a few weeks ago). I went over my 60GB cap during my two most recent billing cycles. The problem: I use Primus TalkBroadband VoIP service instead of a traditional landline, and watch video from legitimate sources like ctv.ca, citytv.com, globaltv.com, treehousetv.com, etc.
5. Bell’s net income last fiscal year was $1.738 billion, for a profit margin of 11.7%. Rogers’ net income last fiscal year was $1.478 billion, for a profit margin of 12.5%. Based upon typical standards of trying to achieve profit margins between 10 and 15%, it’s clear both companies are doing just fine.
6. Claims that Rogers and Bell need to recoup the costs of their infrastructure investments are fine. As a business owner, I know companies exist in order to make money. What it sounds like many people don’t know is that Primus, TekSavvy, Execulink, et al all pay Bell for the privilege to resell their services to the tune of $15 per subscriber per month (I’ve received confidential data to confirm this). So even if Bell doesn’t have you as a customer directly, but you’re using DSL, Bell is making money off the infrastructure (a.k.a. copper phone lines) it delivered to your house with very few exceptions (areas served by Eastlink for example).
7. Until recently, only Bell was mandated to allow resellers to use its infrastructure because a large portion of Bell’s “last mile” was paid for my Canadian taxpayer money. The inherent oligopoly that has existed in most areas since the dawn of cable, and in some areas it’s actually a monopoly (like Aylmer, ON where EastLink owns both the phone and cable infrastructures) allowed Bell and Rogers to simply charge whatever they wanted for high-speed access until the CRTC opened up Bell’s lines to everyone. If Rogers never started offering @Home, and then eventually its own high speed offering, Bell would effectively have a 100% market share on high speed internet wherever they own the phone lines.
8. Middlesex County awarded Bell Aliant a contract several years ago to build up wireless internet capabilities all across Middlesex County. So here is an instance where Bell forked out very little cash, and will profit any time someone living in rural Middlesex County, where DSL and cable internet aren’t available, and sign up for wireless internet service instead. Bell is actually several years behind the curve, as EastLink (formerly known as Amtelecom, and also a former employer of mine) was rolling out wireless access across most of Elgin County back in 2001. Being a publicly traded company at the time, surely if Amtelecom felt they couldn’t make money off the wireless service they wouldn’t have bothered putting it up in the first place.

I have followed this issue (broadband speeds, infrastructure, and access in Canada) for over a decade already. One conclusion I have come to is that Bell and Rogers are not interested in keeping ahead of competitors (because there really aren’t any) or providing you with great service (especially Bell). Their only concerns are shareholders and the bottom line, period. Yes, I know that’s capitalism, but at the end of the day we’re all getting screwed. TekSavvy has indicated they’re going to start laying out their own infrastructure. Start Communications (based in London) already has fibre covering the downtown core, and has indicated they will be extending it as well. Unfortunately the edge of their fibre network still only supports 5Mbps speeds.

Don’t forget to look at places like Chattanooga, TN which has laid out its own fibre-to-the-home network across an area very similar to London’s geography (medium-sized city in the middle, lots of rural areas around it), and they’re providing great speeds at decent prices… synchronous 30Mbps for $57.99 per month, no caps. Amsterdam is laying a FTTH network that will be open access, and so is the entire nation of Australia. So Amsterdam/Australia will provide the network, à la Bell, and then let independent providers resell internet, phone and TV service on top of it. Brilliant, and you know there will be plenty of competition because Australia has actually paid Telstra AUD$43 billion to ditch their legacy copper network.

The internet services offered here in Canada suck, and UBB only makes it worse. We’re ranked 22nd in the world by the OECD… wait until the next ranking, I bet we’ll be ranked 40th or 50th.

Backing up a little bit, I know there are other fees that Bell and Rogers (along with other telcos in their respective areas of the country) have to fork out, like “right of way” fees that municipalities charge for telcos to have the privilege of laying their infrastructure down in our neighbourhoods, and putting up those ugly grey mini-towers all over the places. I will admit I don’t know as much about the “right of way” fees charged by various municipalities as others do, but until Bell/Rogers are more transparent about the types of fees they incur, and how these have to be passed onto the consumer, it’s hard for the average person to make up their own mind on whether it’s fair or not, isn’t it? And yes, of course there are operating costs.

Again, though… the net profits speak for themselves. Maybe dealing with Toronto and Hamilton is a logistical nightmare, but Bell and Rogers seem to be making a healthy profit margins. And then, of course, the premise of heavy bandwidth users needing to pay more than others has been given serious treatment, and determined to be false.

The reality is that UBB is a desperate attempt to keep people from further cutting their expenses, while shifting their video watching habits to web-based services. Instead of compete with Netflix, Rogers and Bell would rather gouge the average customer and prevent them from even using the web to watch video (again, legit or not) in the first place. I’m part of a minority that “cut the cord” 2 years ago. It isn’t easy, but it’s doable. I bet Rogers, Bell, Shaw and Cogeco are freaking out at the idea of consumers moving to Netflix.

But when you think about it, I’m using much of the same infrastructure Rogers actually puts into place to watch TV shows online, instead of via traditional cable. I’m really not using anymore bandwidth than I did before. At the end of the day, the same infrastructure that carries all these bits & bytes also carries voice and TV signals. It’s all data. Internet service fees are not the only way to recoup costs and generate a profit. This goes back to the same point many bloggers and columnists have made about getting to a realistic cost/profit number.

Hell, I’m probably using far less bandwidth than a traditional TV customer uses given the video quality actually available to me online. And I cause less bandwidth on the local head end (similar to a central office, but used to deliver video), instead pumping my traffic via fibre-optic lines between the servers located in Toronto (most likely given I typically only watch on Canadian websites) and Kilworth.

There are many reports that show people using their smartphones more and more, therefore cell phone towers, in lieu of their internet connections. Anyone who saw Cisco’s press release the other day about this would have seen the report, along with those produced by many other vendors and publications. If so many people are shifting their habits over the wireless access, why the huge change in our land-based internet access services?

I’m left asking myself… why UBB on internet services, but not on phone lines, cable, and satellite (especially the first two)? They use the same modern infrastructure to transfer the phone calls and TV shows we’re all watching.

Someone suggested to me that electricity rates were billed using a UBB scheme. True, but hydro is a bad analogy given the fact that we have to generate electricity and transport it to where it’s going to be used. Fibre optic lines are laid, connected to routers, and then sit there in anticipation of traffic. I remember someone telling me about all the dark fibre (a.k.a. unused) that Hamilton once laid in the hopes that businesses would flock there for the capacity. If that infrastructure is still there, then one big component of the capacity already exists.

Lastly, I’ll address the cost per GB sanctioned by the CRTC. $1.90 per GB, and $2.45 per GB in Quebec, is absolutely ridiculous. Hugh Thompson goes through much of the argument here, and he’s right. Even when you factor in all of the other costs associated with running this infrastructure, and then all of the other services that generate revenue from it, you’re left with the billions of dollars in profit that Bell and Rogers are generating.

So call/mail/email your MP, do the same for the CRTC commissioner representing your area of the country, and give them a piece of your mind (or mine). UBB is unnecessary, plain and simple.

You need to open up more. WAY more. The lack of communication we get at the municipal level is abysmal. Compare yourselves to Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty, Ontario Ombudsman Andre Marin, MP Tony Clement, former Toronto Mayor David Miller, or MP Glen Pearson, and you’ll see the difference between your approach and theirs.

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty

In fact, Glen Pearson blogs, tweets and even uploads videos to YouTube! He’s a pretty good example of what more politicians ought to be doing long before they run, during a campaign, and especially after being elected.

Do I expect the politicians themselves to always be the ones communicating with us via the various channels? No, of course not. I know full well their staffers will be doing some of it, and that’s fine. The difference is accessibility, and at least attempting to appear to be a normal person that just happens to be in an elected position of power vs. someone in a position of power telling you what they believe you should be thinking about.

I adore the fact that Dalton McGuinty has a Twitter account, and will tweet about seemingly innocuous things like coming home from his recent trip to China, where his dog showed more enthusiasm for his return than his kids did. It’s real, we all feel that way sometimes, and he actually replies to many tweets himself (according one or two directed at me).

There are a few area politicians who are leading the way, like Nancy Branscombe and Judy Bryant; unfortunately they are the exceptions to the rule in our area.  Middlesex Centre Mayor Al Edmondson, whom I’ve exchanged emails with in the past, has a website that was launched for the recent municipal election that hasn’t been updated since the election. Newly elected London Mayor Joe Fontana recently deleted his Twitter account after saying, during the campaign, he intended to continue communicating with citizens via his Twitter account (which lead to the events surrounding my previous blog entry).

I know what some of you are thinking: Who cares? Why should politicians blog, tweet, or have Facebook pages?

Middlesex Centre Mayor Al Edmondson

At a purely selfish level (for them), to help them get re-elected. If you’re a politician, and you strong believe you’re still the right person for the job, you need to get your positions, accomplishments, and message out there in as many ways as possible. If you think I’m wrong, you might as well not run in 2014. Get done what you can now, then get out.

In four years Twitter, Facebook, blogs – or whatever other medium comes in to replace or supplement those communication platforms – will be far more important than they are now. Much of the electorate in the London area is still catching on to social networking/media sites (for reasons other than sharing funny cat videos), but I myself maintain two Twitter lists full of London-based accounts – right now they track 840 individuals, businesses and organizations.

That’s 840 Londoners on Twitter who talk to 10 friends, who talk to 10 friends, etc. – the math starts to add up quickly! Oh, and that doesn’t count the Londoners with “protected” accounts – you can’t add those to Twitter lists. So the number’s probably closer to 900, if not more.

On a more altruistic level, politicians need to open themselves up in order to show they can take criticism and praise with equal grace, to show they really do care about their constituents whether it’s a riding or a ward, and to help increase their profile overall. It’s important to know who you should speak to regarding issues in your community regardless of the issue falling under municipal, provincial or federal jurisdiction – having name recognition makes your constituents feel better about having a real voice at city/town hall, Queen’s Park or Parliament.

I’m talking to London, Strathroy, Mt. Brydges, Kilworth, Komoka, Dorchester, Arva, Ilderton, St. Thomas, Glencoe, Newbury politicians… get more engaged; whether for the more selfish reasons I outlined above, or more community-building and altruistic reasons. At the moment, I’m not overly concerned why you do it – just do it.

• Yesterday afternoon several people, including myself, noticed that @londonsmayor had been re-registered by someone after former Mayor Anne-Marie DeCicco-Best had changed her Twitter handle to @DeCiccoBest.
• It looked like Joe Fontana, the new Mayor of London, was the person tweeting (or someone on his behalf, which is more likely), despite a misspelled name on the account’s profile (it was ‘Joe Fontama’ before being changed to simply ‘Joe F.’)
• @londonsmayor even replied to someone about the name change/handover saying that it was a simple administrative issue (which is true).
• I noticed a tweet from @londonsmayor last night, asking if anyone knew where he had to go tomorrow (for the swearing in ceremony) and it CC’d @LondonComms. I thought this was pretty funny, and knew immediately that the account was in fact a parody/spoof.
• This morning it was very evident it was a parody since a tweet was sent out saying Joe had been hit by something while riding his bike to the swearing in ceremony, even though Joe was being sworn in just as this was tweeted.
• I called out the fact that it was a parody/spoof account this morning, and several people agreed. No big deal, I still thought it was funny and harmless.
• @LondonComms tweets that they have reported this “hack” to Twitter.
• I take issue of the word “hack,” which this clearly was not.
• @LondonComms tries to reply to me, instead turning the reply into a retweet making it looked like I supported the City reporting the account to Twitter. I took issue with this and dealt with it via direct message, though others called @LondonComms out for it publicly — I appreciate the backup folks!

This led to Deb finding Orpheum’s website and getting my number via the Contact Us page. I end up being quoted in an article about the issue.

Unfortunately, Mayor Fontana is saying he has no intention of continuing to use Twitter after shutting down @JoeForMayor. This is unfortunate, and also a contrast to when he said, during the campaign, that he had intended to continue using Twitter to keep in touch with the populace even after the election.

It’s dumb, really, that he won’t continue to use Twitter to engage the public and connect with potential, future voters. And it’s also extremely shortsighted.

Thankfully the person that had registered @londonsmayor after Anne-Marie relinquished control is back on the beat with @NOTLondonsMayor. I’m really looking forward reading the tweets from London’s own version of @notstevejobs.

Mayor Edmondson,

After reading today’s story in the London Free Press regarding Middlesex County Council acquiring iPads instead of $1,100 laptops (http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2010/08/10/14985046.html), I must challenge the notion that iPads are several hundred dollars cheaper than appropriate laptops for councillor use. Also, a 2 year refresh cycle for computer hardware is almost unheard (and a massive waste of taxpayer dollars) of except for engineers and game developers that need the very latest computer technology.

As a county taxpayer, I’m not happy about this decision to replace laptops only 2 years after purchase. iPads are probably enough, but you can easily find business-grade laptops (small, lightweight & wireless) for $499 – that’s $50 less than the cheapest iPad and they’re much more versatile.

This is yet another example of politicians being enamoured by a piece of technology they don’t need, while ignoring what would really be valuable to them and their citizens.

I eagerly await your response to this email.

UPDATED AUGUST 15, 2010: Mayor Edmondson emailed me back on August 12, and according to him the decision to move to iPads has indeed not actually been made yet even though the London Free Press story makes the case that this is a done deal. As promised, here is the response from Middlesex Centre Mayor Edmondson:

Dear Derek…Thanks for the letter. I would like to comment only on the fact that this is something that has not formally been presented to Council, but appears to being presented as a possible way of saving some money. In terms of the assumption that our councillors are zealous about technology, I would certainly argue the point, as it is far from the truth. Your point about the time to recycle a computer is well taken, as the one which helping to present this to you is much older than those that most County Councilors have, and has only caused me some inconvenience on a couple of occasions.

You should know that it was a giant leap for some Councilors to move away from paper into the wireless world, but as a group we recognized the time money and waste that could be avoided and got on with the change. This same group, less than a year later, were strong proponents of a broadband network for the whole of the County and today that has been established with the exception of one or two towers. This has been another huge technological step forward for County residents and particularly businesses. However, in my mind that does not necessarily lead to the adoption of an i-pod or rather pad as a necessity for carrying on our business, unless a real business case can be made for doing so. Thus far I came face to face with one for ten minutes or so when old faithful here failed at our last meeting. That certainly didn’t convince me that I needed one, nor that I could do a better job because of it. I will wait for the business case, and some tips on the advantages that won’t likely include cute and cuddly.

Thanks again and enjoy your day…Al

Here’s hoping rationale people think this through and re-consider their decision. The notion that iPads will properly replace the councilors’ laptops, aging or otherwise, for the next 3 years is ludicrous. I’m keeping a close eye on the meeting agendas going forward and I may drop in to lend my opinion to full county council if given the chance.

Please reply in the comments, and I would really appreciate it if you would throw in whereabouts you do live. I’ll get it started.

If I could change one thing right now, it would be that Middlesex County/London owned and operated its own fibre-optic network and Internet service provider (ISP) with no bandwidth caps or throttling policies. It would be called MLfibre or FibreLDN and you could get a 100Mbps down (maybe 5Mbps up for residential and 50Mbps up for businesses) for under $100/month.

So… what would you change?

I really enjoyed hearing Sean Galloway, a city planner, talk about ‘The Future of London.’ It was very interesting and exciting, especially once some of my friends and I asked him how much of what he was talking about would eventually be implemented in London. I’m pretty sure the answer was “100%.” Nice! Here is Sean’s Ignite Talk:

Click here to view the embedded video.

Some of the other presenters I really enjoyed were Nik Harron and Chris McInnis. Ignite London’s YouTube account has the first half of the night uploaded so far, the second half of the night is coming soon.

Lastly, I’m embedding my Ignite Talk and then my slides right after them in case you missed the night or wanted to see it over again. Next time I do an Ignite Talk, I’m really going to have to work on not going over 15 seconds per slide (or having less slides and throwing them back-to-back!).

Click here to view the embedded video.

And the slides:

If you’re coming, I hope to see you there and I really hope my talk on MuniFibre gets you thinking about the possibilities!