product management – Observations from Uppsala

(Local) AI, Please Explain This Code

Continuing my exploration of what a local AI model can do, I decided to test them on the task of code analysis. It would be so nice to have an AI model that is tuned and trained on a particular tool or programming system, and that can be distributed for users to run on their own on their local machine, server, or cloud VM. Avoiding the need to run and charge for a custom cloud service and ensuring confidentiality and availability.

Updated 2024-12-12 with Llama-3.3-70B

Reversing out of Reverse

The Intel Simics simulator version 7 removed a long-standing feature from the simulator framework. Reverse execution is no longer available. In its place, in-memory snapshots were introduced, which arguably offer most of the benefits at a lower implementation cost. What happened? I’ve been asked about the reasoning behind the chance on several occasions since I left Intel. I’d like to share my perspective on the decision, as it highlights the challenges of turning an idea into a robust, shippable feature.

The Quarterly Product and Feature Update

I think of myself to be a technical person. I like computers, simulators, code, things like that. And obviously interacting with people and helping them solve their technical problems using technology I know. However, it seems that one of the most impactful contributions made during my time at Intel was to start a meeting series. Maybe you can call it a process innovation.

Delivering AI-Based Solutions is not Always Easy

One of the nice properties of delivering software that users install on their own machines is that once the software has been built and shipped, the cost of running it is handed over to the user. The cost per installation and per user is minimal in terms of compute load on the developing company. Of course there are costs for things like support, but that is different. However, having the customer provide the compute resources is not necessarily that easy when it comes to AI-based setups.

Subscription Software Revisited: SnagIt

The trend to make everything into a subscription service instead of a pay-once use-forever model is well-established. I have defended it for professional software, and I am a mostly happy user of Microsoft365. Still, I must admit that I felt mildly annoyed when my favorite screen capture program, SnagIt, announced they would be switching to a subscription-only model.

The HidrateSpark… Internet of Drinking Bottles

Earlier this Summer, I received a HidrateSpark PRO water bottle as a gift. It is a fascinating piece of “smart” technology. The bottle itself is a decent piece of engineering and a somewhat practical product. But the overall product concept just strikes me as mostly contrived. The associated app is almost comical in its attempts to turn a piece of hardware into a “service”.

Intel Blog: Open-Sourcing the Device Modeling Language

The Device Modeling Language (DML) that we have used with Simics since 2005 is now available in open source! Some more details and examples of what DML looks like can be found in an Intel blog post.

Building or Designing, Lego and IKEA

Back in April, I presented a talk about how you can use Lego as an analogy for software development in the ProductBeats Show. The talk was based on my previous musings about Lego and software. It was a great fun 15 minutes with a good after-discussion moderated by Magnus Billgren. As always at the ProductBeats show, Magnus nudged me and the audience to think. He kicked off the talk by asking the audience and me about the process of assembling IKEA furniture. Is that assembly about building or designing? That is a very god question. Here is my attempt at an answer.

Don’t Look behind the Curtain! (Please)

In a previous blog, I talked a bit about the hazards of coding to an implementation and not a specification, based on 1980s home computers. While the specifics and peculiarities of that case is hopefully confined to old hardware, the lessons are still worth contemplating. There is a modern variant of this phenomenon that is based on open-source software, and that I must admit to feeling a bit annoyed by. Fundamentally, the question is this: when figuring out how to use an API – should you look at the documentation or the implementation?

Minimum Viable (Replacement) Product – The Teams Example

During 2020 and 2021, Intel switched from using Microsoft Skype for Business (also known as Lync) to Microsoft Teams as the primary internal calling, chatting, and conferencing tool. While (finally) Teams has turned into quite a decent communications tool, the transition started a bit too early from a feature completeness perspective. Microsoft in essence gave us an enterprise Minimum Viable Product (MVP). Not a proper Replacement Product (RP). Teams left out many rather important and useful features, degrading the user experience and value, and making my life harder. I don’t think that was particularly well handled. I can understand it as a product manager, but as a user, I don’t like it all.

Intel Blog: How Teaching Users Drives Product Improvements in Simics

I have a post out on the Intel Software blog about my experience developing and delivering training for Simics over the past few years. A key observation is that building training is a great way to test the product, and drives changes and improvements in the product. The blog is found at https://software.intel.com/content/www/us/en/develop/articles/teaching-users-drives-product-improvements-in-simics-sw.html