TechnoScore: 4.7
1 = Lowest Possible Score; 5 = Highest Possible Score www.hecklerdesign.com
Depending on whom you believe, 80-97% of New Year's resolutions fall by the wayside unfulfilled. I don't profess to know why so few resolutions succeed, but thanks to a small company in California I should have no trouble achieving my resolution this year.
For 2008, I resolved to become a minimalist. Or as the rapper Snoop Dogg once sang, "Never have a want, never have a need." Of course, that's an impossible ideal. Instead, I seek to become the antithesis of a pack-rat and possess only the bare minimum. I don't want anything I don't use, including desk space.
Thus, when I recently moved, I replaced my bulky Anthro desk with Heckler Design's sleek OneLessDesk.
It All Started With an Advertisement ...
I first encountered Heckler Design's OneLessDesk in an online advertisement on MacRumors in January. I immediately began an email dialog with Dean Heckler, the man behind the desk. Our discussions resulted in a special edition of TechnoLawyer NewsWire in which we covered OneLessDesk and four other unique desks. Measured by clicks, this issue was our most popular ever.
I also had a personal interest in OneLessDesk, having just moved into a new apartment. It seemed to perfectly address my new minimalist bent and my lack of space, but I had a few reservations. Dean eventually won me over and I placed an order.
Heckler Design limited the first production run of OneLessDesk to 100 units at $899 plus $100 shipping. I was among the early adopters, and for once it paid off. OneLessDesk now sells for $1,199 (including domestic shipping). The price has risen because the price of steel has risen. Dean is exploring other metals for a lower-priced version, but has not yet made any announcements.
The Skinny on OneLessDesk ...
OneLessDesk consists of two brushed steel desks that together take up about half the space of a traditional desk. The upper desk has a usable surface area of 33.5x12 inches, and a height of 30.5 inches. The lower desk has a usable surface area of 30.5x12 inches and a height of 25.5 inches.
The upper desk also contains a hidden shelf that opens at the back of the desk. Designed for accessories like hard drives, USB hubs, and the like, this shelf also features a cable management system in which you can wrap unused cord so that you don't end up with the usual nest of cables on your floor.
Both desks use two white plastic glides for feet, which enables you to slide the lower desk underneath the upper desk. The glides slide easily on my wood floor. I don't know how well they work on carpeting. Unfortunately, OneLessDesk does not have levelers so if your floor is uneven you may need to use a shim to prevent it from wobbling. I suspect this issue arises only on hard flooring, not carpeting.
OneLessDesk arrives in one box. If you open the box correctly (I didn't), the two desks will be standing upright ready for you to grab and move to their location. You'll need to install the glides. Each requires one countersunk Torx 20 screw.
Heckler Design provides everything you need, including a disposable Torx wrench, but I ended up using my own screwdriver for more control. You can watch a video tutorial of the entire unboxing process, including installation of the glides.
My box also contained a personal handwritten card from Dean, a nice touch that I hope he continues, and a package of Pledge stainless steel wipes. Because the desk arrives straight from the factory, you'll need these wipes to remove the grime.
Customer support is first rate. You always tend to receive the best service from the founder of the company. The real test lies ahead when Dean needs to hire employees to carry out this function.
My One Month Test Drive ...
I've now had OneLessDesk in my living room for one month and like it a lot. But I would not recommend it for everyone.
OneLessDesk looks striking. Having also just invested in two brushed steel barstools, I don't think anything compares to brushed steel if you seek a modern, urban look.
OneLessDesk has an inner beauty as well. Its bi-level design means that you can comfortably mouse and type with your feet firmly planted on the floor, minimizing the risk of carpel tunnel syndrome and other disorders. Those under 6 feet tall will especially appreciate the height of the lower desk.
So, should you buy one for your office? Probably not.
I'm about as paperless as it gets, but I have several paper reports on my desk at work at all times. Plus I like having an L-shaped desk at work for eating lunch, meeting with someone, or even power napping.
Most lawyers I know handle more paper and need more desk space than I do. Although OneLessDesk can hold letter-sized paper, it can do so only on one plane. There's no room to spread out.
What about for your home? Bingo.
OneLessDesk is best suited for home use — especially if you prefer modern design (think Design Within Reach), don't want your computer desk to overwhelm the room, and mostly use your home computer for paperless activities.
OneMoreDesk Please ...
My wish list for OneLessDesk is modest, especially for a version 1.0 product. I would like to see a more affordable version that parents could justify buying for their children. I also hope Dean designs glides with a leveler for use on uneven floors.
And finally, I would like to see other OneLess designs or at least the ability to buy OneLessDesk a la carte. For example, I could use another lower desk to hold an iPod speaker system in my bedroom.
Given the sameness in the furniture industry, it's refreshing to see something different like OneLessDesk — especially when it provides greater comfort than existing designs.
OneLessDesk will not only become a conversation piece in your home, but will provide you and your family with many hours of comfortable computer use thanks to its ergonomic bi-level design. It's not just for minimalists like me, but for anyone who seeks style and substance.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
Once again it's time for Battle of the Law Firm Videos. This time we'll channel the WWE and pit no fewer than four law firms against one another. (No hitting below the briefcase, gentlemen.)
The Big Levowski ...
We begin with Even M. Levow, a New Jersey lawyer who specializes in DWI cases. In his video, State vs. Chun: The Biggest Case in New Jersey DWI History (video no longer available, possibly because of this review), Levow discusses his involvement in the Chun case, which challenged the use of the Draeger Alcotest, a computerized replacement for the traditional breathalyzer.
Levow claims that his experience in the Chun case enables him to better defend you should you find yourself on the receiving end of that test. I believe him, but Levow doesn't explain what happened in the Chun case.
A Google search shows that one month before Levow posted his video, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that the state police could use the Draeger Alcotest, but it imposed a number of requirements.
Perhaps Levow felt that this mixed decision was too complex for his YouTube video, but he talks up the Chun case to such an extent you can't help but wonder about its outcome.
Aside from death and taxes, the other certainty in life is that lawyers get paid to spin facts to suit the circumstances. And Levow is a lawyer. Levow should have simply noted that he helped impose certain requirements on the Draeger Alcotest, and that if the police don't follow these procedures you might walk. And just like that he could have explained the outcome of the Chun case.
Enough about the substance. Let's get to the mechanics. The video is well-produced. It shows Levow with a courthouse as a backdrop and his firm's phone number and Web address below. Levow clearly rehearsed. He handles himself well in front of the camera. At 1:52, the video might be a little long, but that's a minor quibble given Levow's good stage presence.
Regarding the accompanying copy, Levow lists his contact information, but because he fails to use the http prefix with his URL, the firm's Web address is not a live link. Also, the copy consists of one big paragraph — and it's poorly written — clearly not the work of a professional copywriter.
Is This a Legal Video or an Aaron Spelling Production?
This clever video features a slide show of bus, car, motorcycle, truck, and train wrecks while a funky soundtrack plays. Thanks to the photos and accompanying titles, we learn that Silvers handles just about every imaginable vehicular accident without any exposition by Silvers himself. Yes, he practices in LA. Did you have to ask?
Unfortunately, Silvers forgets the golden rule of Hollywood — don't screw up the ending. The video ends with a blurry photo of Silvers staring into the camera with a bookcase behind him. Given the slick nature of this video, Silvers should have used an action shot of himself — perhaps walking up the courthouse steps or maybe examining the scene of an accident.
The accompanying copy reads like a cheap classified ad, which is a shame given the creativity that clearly went into the video. Silvers does link to his firm's Web site.
Gomez, who looks a bit like Erik Estrada, makes a number of good points. For example, he tells viewers not to immediately accept blame for car accidents as he runs through a list of variables such as the sobriety of the other driver, road conditions, misplaced or missing road signs, etc.
Also, the video makes excellent use of graphics, including a split screen effect for bullet points and a title below Gomez that wouldn't look out of place on a CNN broadcast.
But at 3:18, the video is too long. Gomez doesn't have the screen presence to pull off such a long monologue. Worst of all, the opening title promotes the agency that created the video. Would BMW allow its ad agency to promote itself at the beginning of its advertisements? No, and neither should any law firm.
The accompanying copy is short and sweet, but it contains a typo (it uses "than" instead of "then"). Also, Gomez does not list his firm's contact information or Web address.
Ishtar, the Sequel ...
Steve Meshbesher of Meshbesher & Associates in his video of the same name has a lot of experience and good information to pass along, but he cannot make a convincing case thanks to poor production values. He sounds like he's in a cave. You can hear traffic outside his office. The camera faces his sun-filled office windows, resulting in a washed-out picture.
As for the script, it sounds extemporaneous, which is fine if you're Robin Williams. Steve is not. If he wrote the script, he didn't rehearse it enough.
Unfortunately, the accompanying copy is also a letdown. It contains a typo ("Meshbesher & Associates should be the Law Firm of you choose"). Who wrote this copy? Who proofread this copy? A 20-page brief will always contain a typo or two. But a typo is inexcusable in a 40-word blurb.
And the Winner Is ...
No one wants law firms to benefit from online videos more than I do. This explains my tough love in these ongoing reviews. Law firms should not create videos on their own nor should they hire posers who have clearly run up against the Peter Principle. Conduct due diligence and hire a true professional who will tell you to edit your script, rehearse, etc.
Michael H. Silvers is the winner today. His simple, slick video gets the job done better than the others. Just change that photo at the end and re-upload.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
As many of you know, I have used a Mac as my main machine since 1990. As a company, we currently own 4 Macs and 3 PCs with 2 new Macs about to replace 2 old Macs and 1 PC (one of the new Macs — mine — will also run Windows). I even watch Steve Jobs' keynote presentations (they're more entertaining than most TV shows).
Mac users have a reputation for evangelizing their choice of computer platform to others — kind of like a missionary. I've done it myself. But I'll be the first to admit that when Mac users act with such speed and zeal that they miss the point and fail to make a cogent argument, they can become annoying.
Case in point.
In the April 2nd issue of TechnoLawyer NewsWire we covered the Asus MK241H, a 24 inch LCD monitor with a built-in Webcam for video-conferencing.
Almost immediately, two Mac fans within Technolawyer responded. The first wrote:
"Or ... you could just get an Apple PowerBook — either the iBook or the MacBook Pro. Both have a camera built in along with video conferencing software which runs like ... well, like a Mac."
This response has several problems. First, a few factual errors. The iBook and PowerBook never had a built-in Webcam (iSight). Apple introduced this feature with the MacBook and MacBook Pro in 2006. The MacBook Air also has a Webcam.
Second, did he read the article? We covered a 24 inch display with a Webcam! Suggesting that those interested in such a display instead use a notebook with a 13, 15, or 17 inch display misses the point — by 7-11 inches.
Apparently, he forgot that Apple sells two "headless" Macs — Mac Pro and Mac mini. People who use these Macs need external displays just as much as those who use headless PCs. And I know that at least some of these people (like me) want an integrated Webcam. So the Asus MK241H doesn't appeal only to PC users, but to Mac users as well.
Unfortunately, Apple has ignored its very own customers in this regard. It has not updated its line of 20, 23, and 30 inch Cinema Displays since 2004. Yes, 2004! None of them have a built-in Webcam. (Apple changed the specifications slightly in 2006.)
The other person who responded wrote:
"For several years, Apple's iMacs (computers integrated with monitors) have included built in video cameras, along with their excellent video conferencing software iChat. It's good to see the PC world is catching up."
While the iMac line does include a model with a 24 inch display, the line about the PC world catching up again ignores all the Mac Pro and Mac mini users who want a display with an integrated Webcam.
So, why would someone want a Mac Pro or Mac mini in the first place? Many reasons exist.
For example, the Mac Pro is the fastest Mac by far. It supports dual displays out of the box. Its four hard drive bays eliminate the need for external drives and messy cables.
The Mac mini is extremely portable and cheaper than a laptop. Set up a 24 inch monitor, keyboard, and mouse at your home, office, and vacation home, and just shuttle the Mac mini among all three locations.
Sadly, this tale has a sad ending. The Webcam in the Asus MK241H does not work with iChat, the video-conferencing software in Mac OS X.
In other words, isn't it about time Apple caught up with the PC world?
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
In Abraham's video, Commercial Litigation Lawyer/Attorney in Texas — Overview, partner Randall Owen Sorrels discusses his firm's experience helping the little guy take on large corporations. The video alternates between takes of Sorrels looking like he's being interviewed and some Ken Burns-style photos.
I admire any law firm that uses YouTube as a marketing channel because so few law firms do. That said, this video has several flaws.
The director should have used more than one camera angle when filming Sorrels. Since we don't sense the presence of an interviewer, perhaps Sorrels should have faced the camera like a news anchor. Also, I find the photos used for the B-roll segments lackluster. Perhaps the director should have used video footage of Houston and the law firm.
Sorrels makes some important points, but his script sounds like an ad (it shouldn't), including platitudes that we have all heard a zillion times. Instead, why not take advantage of YouTube's longer format to discuss a recent case with a successful outcome?
The video's best segment occurs when Sorrels describes litigation as being bad for business and his firm's attempt to minimize such disruption by resolving disputes as efficiently as possible. Also, he provides a link back to the firm's Web site in the About This Video section.
Finally, I understand the importance of search engine optimization, but videos should have real titles since they presumably tell stories. Besides, you can kill two birds with one stone. For example, Abraham's could have used something like: How to Find a Lawyer to Handle Your Commercial Litigation in Texas.
In the video, Oginski discusses why there is no such thing as a question to never ask. He explains why you need to learn about all the facts before trial, including those damaging to your case. Oginski provides real information here! He also scores points by facing the camera and addressing the audience.
On the downside, the video features some cheesy music at the beginning and the end. I wouldn't have a problem with it except it drowns him out at the end. His editor should have used a more gradual fade-in. Also, inexplicably for such a savvy online lawyer, Oginski fails to link to his site in the About This Video section.
The winner? Oginski by director's verdict. Case closed.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
One of our favorite contributors, trial consultant Lynn Packer, posted a YouTube video two days ago that showcases his DepoDisplay paperless deposition system.
Lynn has written several TechnoFeature articles for us in which he recounted his struggle to modernize courtrooms in Utah. Therefore, it's encouraging to see his vision up and running, albeit not in a courtroom, but in a forward-thinking Utah law firm.
More impressive than the courtroom gear is the DepoDisplay deposition system, which features a large screen at the foot of the deposition table for displaying exhibits and two operator-controlled cameras for capturing all the action. Watching this video is like traveling forward in time to a deposition in 2015 (click here if you can't see the video below).
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
Blawg Review is not just a blog, it's a clever social networking concept. Every week, a different blawg hosts Blawg Review, pointing out what it deems the most interesting blawg Posts from the previous week. Sometimes, the hosting blog will develop a theme around Blawg Review.
As you can see, 151 Blawg Reviews have preceded this one. Today, at last, it's our turn. Don't worry. You're in good hands. Blawg Review is similar to our BlawgWorld eBook.
The former contains links to Posts whereas the latter reprints entire Posts. Both have the same goal — expose people to blawgs and the excellent content they publish free of charge.
Given our BlawgWorld legacy, we thought we would canvas the 77 blawgs that comprise the latest edition of our eBook to see what they've published lately.
And then we realized that 77 is quite a large number. Fine for an eBook, but maybe not for a blog post. Time for Plan B.
This being TechnoLawyer, we decided to canvas the law practice management and legal technology blawgs within BlawgWorld. A few of these blawgs have fallen off the radar, but most of them (29) continue to crank out great content as evidenced by our selections below. (My commentary appears in parentheses.)
Because many other bloggers were kind enough to send us submissions for Blawg Review, we have also showcased our favorite submissions.
Our Picks from the Practice Management and Technology Blawgs in BlawgWorld ...
Above the Law reports on the most shocking court transcript of the year. (Are you sure this isn't the latest Quentin Tarantino script?)
Adam Smith, Esq. debates whether a blog can benefit a large law firm. (No comment from Kevin O'Keefe yet. Three, two, one ...)
Anonymous Lawyer explains why there's not much Anonymous Lawyer lately. (We suggest Jeremy work as a contract lawyer for a month on one of the inevitable Bear Stearns lawsuits. That'll provide some inspiration.)
Between Lawyers announces a new book by Dennis Kennedy and Tom Mighell, The Lawyer's Guide to Collaboration Tools and Technologies: Smart Ways to Work Together. (We're awaiting our review copy.)
DennisKennedy.blog dishes out some advice to lawyers who want to start a solo practice. (Trail Carolyn Elefant for a week.)
Futurelawyer's Rick Georges further criticizes PaperPort 11, this time by proxy. (The joys of activation.)
Golden Practices provides some tips on responding to RFPs, including when not to respond. (How about wearing a swimsuit to your next beauty contest?)
JD Bliss Blog reports on a group of Stanford Law School students who have started a movement — 1,000 strong on Facebook — to improve associate life at large law firms. (Until they become partners, that is.)
LawBiz Blog finds a law firm profitability lesson in a college hoops game. (Go Bruins!)
Leadership for Lawyers comments on the ABA's "Blawg 100," a list of the top 100 legal blogs. (For the record, we was robbed!)
Legal Business Development explains why ignoring "good ideas" for growing your practice might actually help you achieve that goal. (Okay then, no swimsuit at your next beauty contest.)
Legal Ease Blog explores the risks associated with evaluating lawyers on the number of hours they bill. (Attach this Post when submitting your time.)
Legal Marketing Blog provides six tips on effective marketing in a weakening economy. (Tip Number 7: Stop reading this blog post and get back to work.)
Legal Sanity applies the broken windows theory to law practice, particularly keeping clients happy. (It's the little things ... like returning phone calls.)
Life at the Bar explains what it's like when a lawyer becomes a party to a lawsuit and needs to hire a lawyer. (If you really want to blow your mind, think about a lawyer hiring a lawyer to sue a lawyer for malpractice.)
Want an extra $100,000 on your W-2 this year? More Partner Income explains how. (No, you won't have to send a check or money order for $59.95 for a set of videotapes.)
Nerino Petro's Compujurist.com recently published an in-depth review of Microsoft OneNote 2007. (Shame on us for not doing so.)
Passion, People and Principles has assembled the 20 worst Beatles songs as proof that "no-one ever achieves a consistently high standard." (Someone doesn't like the White Album.)
Ross Ipsa Loquitur tells you how to email Steve Ballmer. (Because of the volume of messages he receives, his reply may come from a retirement community 40 years from now.)
Slaw unveils the Slaw Timeline, a PDF file that summarizes each blog Post published during the past week using a timeline. (Did they use TimeMap? TimelineXpress? Timeline Maker Professional? Do tell.)
Strategic Legal Technology discusses two new social networks for lawyers, JD Supra and Legal Onramp, describing them as "conceptually similar to Counsel Connect." (Let's not forget LawCommerce.com.)
The Common Scold's Monica Bay becomes the last person on the planet to buy an iPod. (Her Walkman bypassed eBay and went straight to the Smithsonian.)
The Mac Lawyer summarizes a recent seminar on using a Mac for trial presentations. (Tip: Hire Steve Jobs to give your closing argument.)
The Marcus Perspective delves into the world of surveys, and provides some tips on how to use and not misuse them. (Take that Richard Dawson.)
The [Non]Billable Hour concludes that the only real difference between a large law firm and a venture-backed startup company is the $5,000 espresso machine. (Does anyone sell cost recovery software for macchiatos?)
What About Clients? reports that cost cutting at large companies may benefit small law firms. (Or perhaps law firms in India.)
Wired GC explores the problems general counsel face when they cut legal costs. (Like having to pay in Rupees.)
Our Picks from This Week's Blawg Review Submissions ...
Slate's new legal blog, Convictions, argues that the Supreme Court has a pro-business bias. (Well, the Framers were wealthy businessmen.)
Death and Taxes has an excellent cross-selling suggestion for family law practitioners. (Ka-ching!)
Small Business Trends echoes our sentiments about the foolishness of not listing executive bios on your Web site. (We told you so.)
Sharp Brains suggests you try to relax a little. (Maybe we should have linked to just one blog post in this Blawg Review.)
Professor Marc John Randazza of the Legal Satyricon took Sharp Brains' advice and makes two important announcements as a result. (Congratulations.)
Blawg Review has information about next week's host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
Earlier this year I peered into my crystal ball, conjured up Johnny Carson's Carnac, and set forth five legal technology predictions for 2008. I also pointed to the predictions of others, but conspicuously missing was the Dick Clark of such predictions — Dennis Kennedy.
Please read the article and reply with your thoughts. For the most part, I agree with predictions 1-3 and 5-8, but couldn't disagree more with Dennis on number 4: The Death Throes for Email?
Ouch, Dennis. That's my home turf!
Dennis begins:
"We're all buried by email. If you have a BlackBerry, you're buried all day wherever you are at and you feel like you can never get away."
This idea that people are buried by email is a myth largely propagated by companies that sell email alternatives. We're all addicted to email, not overwhelmed by it. Maybe an addiction isn't healthy, but it sure is fun. Those of us who can't help checking our email one last time before bed or before the plane takes off or [insert guilty email pleasure here] must find it enjoyable on some level or else why bother?
As it turns out, email is extremely well-suited to human beings. Recent research has shown that people don't multitask well. Email breaks up our world into bite-sized chunks. When you're inside an email message, you tend to focus on just that message. The world around you disappears for a minute. That's healthy.
I think people tend to use the words "email" and "overwhelmed" together because email often creates "tasks." So it's not the email that's overwhelming, it's the tasks they contain. People who feel overwhelmed by tasks may need a better task management system or an administrative assistant or both.
Regarding CrackBerrys and their ilk, Dennis has stated on several occasions that he does not use one. The people I know who use these devices (myself included) like being connected to our email all the time because we can process it when we have nothing better to do (or don't like what we're doing) but don't have access to a computer. We feel lost and out of touch when we don't have these devices with us.
Dennis continues:
"At the same time, some studies indicate that 80-90% of Internet email is spam, and a large fraction of internal email is not much better than spam."
As I've noted many times, the volume of spam sent is irrelevant. All that matters is what you actually receive.
As for internal mail, your colleagues want to keep you in the loop for reasons both good and bad. If you switch to an email alternative, these messages will simply take a different form. Etiquette training is the answer here, not technology.
Dennis adds:
"You increasingly hear people saying that "email is broken." The real difficulty with email is that we are asking email to do far more than what was intended for. Email is for sending, well, email messages. We use it for everything — from a document management system to a collaboration platform."
That's what we thought three years ago so we started using Basecamp, a Web-based project management system. Basecamp features its own messaging system that keeps conversations in threads. In fact, we used Basecamp with Dennis when he wrote TechnoLawyer NewsWire.
But Basecamp failed.
By and large, our clients and contributors found the messaging system less convenient than email. When someone sends a message, you receive an email alert. You then have to click a link in the alert to respond in your browser. Rightly so, people just wanted to reply in their email program.
You might think a little extra work is worth the reward — threaded discussions. Nope, as I recently discovered first-hand. We produced our eBook using Basecamp. As a result, none of the messages associated with our eBook exist where I want them — in my email program and in my searchable email archive.
Instead, they're in Basecamp, walled off — a prison we're escaping this month as we migrate to Google Apps Premier. You see, Google got it right. Don't force a new messaging system on people. Let them use email. But give them document collaboration (Google Docs and Spreadsheets) and a dashboard with file sharing (Google Sites).
Lots of other companies get it too. Witness the explosion of email archiving solutions. Whether regulated or not, most companies nowadays want the ability to store and search their email.
Dennis writes further:
"People are gradually finding that RSS feeds, news readers, instant messaging, phone calls, and even face-to-face meetings are often better and more appropriate than email for certain types of communication."
That's certainly true, but none of these replace email, except perhaps instant messaging for those under the age of 25. But instant messaging doesn't scale even if you have two or three monitors.
Dennis continues:
"Some even suggest that the trend toward social networking platforms, like Facebook, is in some part due to the failures of email."
A prediction of my own and a wager to boot: I'll bet good money that email will outlast all Web-based social networks, especially those that eschew email. Instead, look for the opposite — better email clients that acknowledge what we've known all along — email is the ultimate social network.
Dennis adds:
"Email has also become unreliable as spam filters and overloaded inboxes make it difficult to be certain that email messages are actually delivered and received."
See my discussion above about Google and Postini.
Dennis concludes:
"The trend to watch is the movement away from email into appropriate tools for the task at hand. Two trillion instant messages were sent in 2007. Firms with policies against instant messaging will find that their clients will insist on the use of it. It has become difficult to send large files by email at a time when it has become essential to send large files. Watch for use of online services for the transfer of large files to grow. Almost every communication alternative to email can be expected to grow in 2008. Email will not die as a tool for lawyers, but 2008 will demonstrate how rickety and sickly the email system has become."
While training people to use the right tool for the job is critical, email's power will continue to grow because people use it when they want to create a searchable record of something noteworthy. No other technology can match email in this regard, especially with all the investment in archiving and storage (Google Apps Premier, at the low end of the enterprise spectrum, now provides 26GB of storage for each email account). Expect to see smarter email clients, even more storage, and better ways to search and mine our growing email collections.
Email isn't in its death throes. It's just molting.
Thoughts on this or Dennis' other predictions? Please reply!
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
I didn't attend LegalTech 2008 this year, but I didn't miss anything.
And no, I'm not criticizing LegalTech. I'm praising it. ALM (the
company behind LegalTech) covered the event extensively in its Legal
Blog Watch blog. Additionally, a number of other bloggers and
podcasters also covered LegalTech. We've compiled the best of these
posts and podcasts below with some commentary.
LEGALTECH AT TECHNOLAWYER ...
Why didn't we attend LegalTech given that our office is less than a
mile away from the Hilton? If you're a non-ALM publication, you cannot
conduct press briefings at the Hilton as there is no place to sit.
Also, hotels serve notoriously bland food. Life is too short for
processed turkey sandwiches.
So instead we invited legal vendors to meet with us at our office in
our whisper-quiet conference room, which we stocked with high-end
gourmet goodies from six best-of-breed New York purveyors.
The result?
Last year we scheduled 23 meetings at the Hilton. This year, we
scheduled 41 meetings at our office! I'd like to thank everyone who
attended. Same time next year!
As a result of these meetings, you'll learn about lots of new
products in the coming weeks — plus some reviews as well. For now, you
can get a "taste" of these meetings by checking out the all-day menu we provided.
The photos above show ALM's LegalTech flyer,
one of the 41 meetings we held during LegalTech in our conference room,
and Eleni's New York cookies, which were among the gourmet goodies we
offered our guests. Seated in the conference room from left to right
counterclockwise: Me, my colleague Sara Skiff, Jobst Elster, Vice President of Envision Agency, and M.W. Whit McIsaac, President & CEO of Client Profiles. JoAnna Forshee, CEO of Envision Agency, snapped the two conference room photos.
ALM'S EXTENSIVE COVERAGE OF LEGALTECH ...
According to Law Technology News editor Monica Bay, she and her team decided to live blog LegalTech the day it started. As a result, the coverage is more like a series of snapshots in a photo album than a documentary. But it's nonetheless impressive and well worth reading. Because blogs are organized in reverse chronological order, we've un-reversed the best posts for you.
Aaref Hilaly, the CEO of Clearwell Systems, who was kind enough to visit with us and who authors the blog E-Discovery 2.0, published the best account of LegalTech from the perspective of a vendor.
Brett Burney, eDiscovery expert and one of the nicest guys in the business, covered the highlights from the E-Discovery Institute's event, Counselor, Why Can't You Google It? I'm sure the event lasted an hour, but you can read Brett's excellent recap in less than five minutes.
Ross Kodner, legal technologist extraordinaire and long-time Microsoft critic, concluded that Microsoft made the most electrifying product announcement at LegalTech.
In his post, LegalTech Wrap Up, Doug echoes my criticism about nowhere to sit (just in case you didn't believe me and thought we were just making excuses to stay in our office), writing:
"Overall, I found LegalTech to be crowded and loud. I was always looking for a place to sit and chat with people but there was nowhere to be found."
Finally, Thomson West created a blog dedicated to its announcements at LegalTech. Watch the videos, which are like watching product demos in a trade show booth — but better because you're not actually in the booth.
LISTEN TO LEGALTECH COVERAGE ...
Two Legal Talk Network podcasts also covered LegalTech. Below you'll find links to the actual MP3 files. You can also find these podcasts in iTunes.
In her new podcast, Law Technology Now, Monica Bay and guests Craig Ball and Henry Dicker discuss LegalTech, including some inside baseball.
Bob Ambrogi and J. Craig Williams cover LegalTech in back-to-back episodes of their Lawyer2Lawyer podcast. I was invited to participate in one of these shows, but couldn't fit it into my schedule. Nonetheless, they are still worth a listen (ha).
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
As usual, this week's LegalTech New York trade show and conference will bring a veritable blizzard of product announcements that we'll cover in detail in due course in TechnoLawyer NewsWire. We have 41 meetings lined up over the next three days (gulp).
For now, we've put together a linked list of all the noteworthy press releases and articles that have come our way. Unfortunately, some press releases are embargoed until tomorrow or later this week so we cannot share them with you now.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
Last week, we debuted The TechnoList — a linked list of products and services from the companies that most supported TechnoLawyer in 2007 — TechnoLawyer Preferred Vendors. In all, you'll find 71 products organized within 28 topics.
Because our focus on email newsletters comprised of peer-written content is an anomaly in the legal publishing world, we feel it's important to pay tribute to forward-thinking companies not afraid to break with tradition.
That said, TechnoLawyer is not a charity. If TechnoLawyer Preferred Vendors did not benefit from their involvement in TechnoLawyer, I would be in a law firm writing a brief rather than writing this message. And you would not have a TechnoLawyer newsletter to read every day during lunch.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
[Publisher's Note: Today, a special treat — a guest TechnoEditorial by industry legend Ross Kodner. In the TechnoEditorial below, Ross tells us what he thinks of Windows Vista as only Ross can. — Neil J. Squillante]
Welcome to the wonderful world of Vista (for a similar reference see: "Dante's Inferno" — impossible to distinguish between the two). Here's just one fun My Own Personal Hell (MOPH) observation — drive space disappearing at the rate of sometimes several gigabytes per day. It's because the System Restore function goes completely bonkers and gobbles up tons of space because it creates multiple restore points every day on some systems ... with no good explanation.
On my nearly new Thinkpad T61 which I finally decided to transition to, Vista has so thoroughly screwed itself up and in such a complete unfixable way (won't download updates and as I found, hasn't done so since August — nice). And with that, a what-should-be-screaming T7500 machine with Readyboost built-in, it feels more like a Pentium III with 256 Mb of RAM.
And Microsoft? They won't touch it because it's an OEM copy and say Lenovo needs to help. Lenovo of course says "duh, no clue, call Microsoft." Think about that absurdity — aren't virtually 90+% of Windows copies OEM copies that come pre-installed on new PC systems? That means Microsoft doesn't have to support virtually ANY Windows issues without charging $99 for a service incident? Oh, but wait — Microsoft says they will support for free, any issues related to update problems with Windows. But I challenge anyone to try and find out how to contact them for free on such an issue. On the U.S. Microsoft site, if you click on ANY of the links on this subject, you get jetted off on a digital Concorde to the Microsoft U.K. Web site — pages having nothing to do with support. That's nice (said in a mocking Borat voice).
Before you get too deep into setting up a new Vista machine, you should read my newest CLE materials on Vista right now. If you're going the masochistic route and staying with MOPH, then by all means, please do the things I've recommended — all learned the hard way after nearly a year with Vista.
But for me, faced with the prospect of having no choice but to do a clean install (which is about three days of screwing around reloading apps, data, etc.), I'm giving up on Vista on this machine. I've already asked Lenovo to send me their Vista to XP Pro "downgrade" kit. Which for me, will most certainly feel like an upgrade after logging over 6 days of totally wasted time — blood-pressure-increasing, angst-inducing wasted time. I hate Vista more than I have ever had previously — which was considerable.
There's nothing whatsoever I like in any way about Vista. Oh yeah, forgot to mention the last straw from last night. I had already upgraded the T61 to 2 GB of RAM when I ordered it. I wanted to see if doubling to 4 GB might have any positive effect on performance. So I installed the 2 x 2 GB SODIMMs and lo and behold, Vista reported only 3046 GB of RAM. After three hours of diagnosis including installing the RAM in other machines, I thought to check the T61's BIOS and sure enough, there was 4,096 GB of RAM showing. So no issue with the T61, no issue with the RAM itself, yet another Vista BS issue. Google the issue of underreported RAM on Vista systems and a flood of hits point out that everyone has faced the same frustration because the 32-bit version of MOPH is limited to only 3 GB of RAM while the 64 GB version can go up to 8. Again, nice.
Vista is the biggest software screw-up of all time. I've lived with its irritations for nearly a year. While I will keep it running on my Toshiba laptop, it's going away as fast as I can make it happen on my primary production T61.
Vista is the #1 reason Apple has been so successful in the overnight turnaround of its Mac product line. The best feature of the MacBook and iMac series is they DON'T have Vista, not the fact they now have Leopard.
Vista is Windows ME but many degrees worse. Vista is Microsoft BOB but much less reliable. Vista is MOPH and deserves to die. Painfully. Slowly. With as much agony as can possibly be inflicted on an inanimate intangible object.
So unless you subscribe to self-flagellation as form of personal amusement, "downgrade" now. Virtually every laptop maker offers a legal Microsoft-endorsed Vista-to-XP "downgrade" plan upon request. From one friend to another, "Friends don't let friends compute with Vista."
A version of the above article originally appeared in Ross Ipsa Loquitur, a legal technology blog written by industry legend Ross Kodner. Ross serves as the president of MicroLaw, which has helped law firms with technology since 1985, and is the only five-time individual Technolawyer @ Award winner, including the lifetime achievement award for Legal Technology Consultant of the Year in 1999. He also contributed to BlawgWorld 2007-08 with TechnoLawyer Problem/Solution Guide.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
[Publisher's Note: Today, a special treat — a guest TechnoEditorial by industry legend Ross Kodner. In the TechnoEditorial below, Ross responds to some questions about the state of legal technology recently sent to him by a reporter unaffiliated with TechnoLawyer. — Neil J. Squillante]
WHAT SOFTWARE, GADGET, OR DEVICE DO YOU THINK ATTORNEYS MOST NEED TO INCORPORATE INTO THEIR WORK HABITS?
Lawyers don't need more gadgets and devices. Lawyers need to re-focus on how to better use the basic tools they already have for document generation, case information management, document/email/paper management, and their billing and financial systems.
Most firms I encounter barely use the systems they've already spent money on — including things as mundane as Microsoft Word. Smart law firms realize that effective use of technology is not about buying new things to solve problems in most cases, but rather focusing on better use of the core systems they already likely own. And realizing that ultimately, it's all about smart, simple, and practical procedures, and workflow. And further realizing that technology tools are just enablers to make sure processes from initial contact with a prospective client, through conflict checking and matter intake, through case handling, all the way to file archiving closure are done in the most effective way.
BUT IF THERE WAS ONE SOFTWARE APPLICATION LAWYERS REALLY NEED ...
I'd have to actually make it three (sorry — I can't decide):
First: Microsoft Word 2007 — the latest release of this product is LEAPS AND BOUNDS superior in every way to its miserably obtuse, perpetually mystifying, and downright exasperating predecessor Word 2003. Where Word 2003 has been a virtual instrument of torture for its users (victims?), Word 2007 is so dramatically improved, it seems almost un-Microsoft-like in its totally revamped and eminently logical layout. It's the first time I've ever publicly praised Microsoft Word.... I even have a new CLE program on precisely this subject that has been presented already around the country. It can be downloaded as a PDF.
As I've been pointing out in my CLE programs for several years, the next one is a little utility for Outlook users called Anagram. This little $30 Outlook-connected software utility allows you to highlight a name/address block in any program — in a document, in an email, on a Web site — and with a single keystroke, it splits it into individual fields of information and inserts them as an Outlook contact. This is a HUGE timesaver and the difference between saving contacts and not having the time to bother with the tedious manual approach. Thanks to techno-pal Browning Marean from DLA Piper for this tip — it's saved me, as well as hundreds of my clients, a significant amount of time.
Next up would be Metadata Assistant by PayneGroup. It's the first and, in my opinion, still the pre-eminent metadata removal and review tool for Word, Excel and PowerPoint files. In spite of years of educational efforts, a shocking number of lawyers are seemingly unaware of what metadata even is, no less its very real danger and threat to expose confidential information in electronically transmitted documents. And then add in the practical issues related to viewing hidden metadata in electronic documents obtained via discovery in litigation and this becomes perhaps the single most important piece of software that needs to be installed, and in informed use on every single law practice computer worldwide.
WHERE IS THE STATE OF WISCONSIN IN THE MOVEMENT TOWARD ELECTRONIC FILING AND WHAT SORTS OF SOFTWARE WILL THAT REQUIRE?
While this question addresses this issue in Wisconsin, many states are in much the same position in regard to e-filing. I'd say Wisconsin is slightly behind in state-based electronic filing of court documents compared to what I've seen in other states. Of course the Federal Court system has had electronic filing for years through its Pacer system. What Wisconsin lawyers need to prepare for the eventual and inevitable electronic filing in state courts and agencies is the ability to create PDF files from every workstation in their office.
The safest (but most costly) way to do this is using actual Adobe Acrobat (currently version 8 Professional is chock full of useful legal features like Bates stamping, secure redaction, etc. and is the version most should have) and especially to master it's critical functions related to securing PDFs to prevent alteration be recipients and removal of PDF metadata using the Examine Document feature in the latest release. Acrobat also supports secure digital signature technology which may very well be required for verification of online-filed court documents in Wisconsin (and likely other states) in the future.
MANY ATTORNEYS ARE CONCERNED WITH THE SECURITY OF ELECTRONIC COMMUNICATION AND ARE THEREFORE HESITANT TO USE IT? ARE THOSE CONCERNS WELL-FOUNDED?
Absolutely. Sending an email containing confidential client or firm information over the Internet makes it disturbingly easy to intercept and exploit. I don't think there's anyone out there today who doesn't get the concept that ordinary email is completely insecure. But the vast majority of lawyers routinely, and in the ordinary course of business, send confidential and sometimes highly sensitive information via email every day.
This poses a fundamental technical ethical issue — if a lawyer knowingly transmits confidential information which they are ethically duty bound to protect over a known insecure medium, could it not be argued that each incident could constitute an ethical violation? It's an interesting subject for debate.
Until we have an explicit ethics opinion or rule that clarifies what obligations a lawyer has to protect confidential client electronic communications, I recommend erring on the side of caution. I tell my clients they should include a "Communications" section in their engagement agreements. It should state something to the effect of:
"We will use Internet email to communicate with you and on your behalf during the course of our representation of you. It is widely known that ordinary Internet email is entirely insecure. If you would like us to engage in something more secure than ordinary Internet email, please indicate so, otherwise we will presume that ordinary Internet email is acceptable."
I believe this satisfies the lawyer's obligation — the client is made aware of the risk and is given an opportunity to opt into some kind of secure/encrypted email approach.
DO YOU FIND RESISTANCE AMONG ATTORNEYS TO ADOPT NEW TECHNOLOGIES? IF SO, WHAT DO THINK IS THE MAIN CAUSE OF THAT RESISTANCE?
Sure. Perpetually. It's not just lawyers — it's most people. Human nature makes us pain avoiders — we tend to gravitate towards the easiest way to do the things we have to do. Change flies in the face of pain avoidance. Most lawyers I've met tend to bristle at the idea of changing their technology and interrupting the daily status quo. Even if logically, they know their practice is inefficient in many areas, they at least have gotten really good at efficiently being inefficient! It's the age-old progress-limiting trap of the devil you know often seems preferable to the one you don't.
The irony here is that the way to break out of that vicious circle and get off the endless treadmill is to step back and streamline practice approaches and procedures to improve client representation and minimize the stress of the reactive situations where fires have to be put out. Of course, alternatively, there's always Prozac.
The minority of my clients continent-wide, however, who see that change can be intensely positive. They see that there are always way to improve a practice approach, and streamline operations and maximize profitability by reducing non-billable administrative time as much as possible through smart application of procedures and technology, and that client service/retention can often be dramatically improved. These firms are the "super-competitors" because they'll eat change-resistant law firms for lunch before the victims even know it has happened.
WHAT IS YOUR OPINION OF VOICE RECOGNITION SOFTWARE IN GENERAL? IN TERMS OF APPLICATION IN THE LEGAL FIELD?
Voice recognition has been around since the mid-1990's in a mainstream sense. But finally, within the last 12 months, after more than 15 years of hype and frustration — voice recognition now works the way most users would expect it to.
The latest version of the leading Dragon NaturallySpeaking voice recognition software is just plain stunning.... It works the way people expect with virtually none of the drawbacks of prior generations such as cumbersome initial "training" requirements. Run it on a contemporary PC with a capable USB-connected headset or an approved handheld digital recorder and people will be blown away by how effective it is. Even if they had bad experiences with prior releases of these products.
Everyone can talk faster than they can type, and with body text being entered into word processing documents, lengthier emails, even time entries and case notes dictated into your case manager, voice recognition and its companion related concept of digital dictation now meet or exceed expectations. Now if only they can overcome the early bad experiences people had that turned them off to earlier iterations of this technology.
Colleague Jim Calloway blogged about the current edition of Dragon NaturallySpeaking (version 9). It's a must-read for TechnoLawyer member Chris Middleton (see his Question below) and everyone else for that matter.
IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE FELT I SHOULD HAVE ASKED YOU THAT I HAVEN'T?
I could go on ad infinitum on topics like why I think law practices would be certifiably nuts not to have mission-critical tools such as case management and document managements systems, the critical distinctions between IT (Information Technology) and LT (Legal Technology), or how effective my Paper LESS Office process has been over the years, or how lawyers using WiFi connections in public wireless hotspots is absolutely insecure and should never be done when transmitting client-related information versus using secure wireless broadband cards offered by cell providers, or how badly law firms tend to apply process and systems training for their lawyers and staff using "memorization" as the modality versus task oriented knowledge-building ... but we can leave those for another day.
A version of the above article originally appeared in Ross Ipsa Loquitur, a legal technology blog written by industry legend Ross Kodner. Ross serves as the president of MicroLaw, which has helped law firms with technology since 1985, and is the only five-time individual Technolawyer @ Award winner, including the lifetime achievement award for Legal Technology Consultant of the Year in 1999. He also contributed to BlawgWorld 2007-08 with TechnoLawyer Problem/Solution Guide.
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
Apparently, Dennis and I have different notions of a young gun. Tom is my age. I define a young gun as someone under the age of 30.
Legends like Ross Kodner and Dennis Kennedy were in their twenties when they started writing about legal technology. Why isn't there a Ross 2.0 or Dennis 2.0 on the scene?
Well, maybe there is.
Meet Robin Hood (his real name), a third year law student at Mississippi College of Law. Concerned about the error-prone nature of using previous documents to create new documents at the law firm where he clerks, he created a set of Microsoft Word macros for drafting routine documents such as letters and pleadings. He also bought a copy of Dragon NaturallySpeaking so that he could verbally produce these documents.
Robin demoed his work on YouTube as you would expect a young gun to do. Watch his instructive video, Speech Recognition for Lawyers (click here if you can't see the video below).
About TechnoEditorials
A TechnoEditorial is the vehicle through which we opine and provide tips of interest to managing partners, law firm administrators, and others in the legal profession. TechnoEditorials appear first in TechnoGuide, and later here in TechnoLawyer Blog. TechnoGuide, which is free, also contains exclusive content. You can subscribe here.
In past years, we have published the predictions of others. But this year we bring you our own predictions.
1. Viva Law Evolution!
Don't expect any revolutionary changes from 2007. Most of the lawyers who presided over law firms five years ago let alone one year ago remain in charge today. It takes decades for management to change across a profession. The old guard embraces new technology, but out of necessity, not because they grew up with a mouse in their hand.
Talk to me in 20 years when today's young lawyers (under age 35) are running the show. At that point, the differences from today will be dramatic. But then as now, the differences between 2027 and 2028 will be evolutionary, not revolutionary.
2. Apotheosis of the General Counsel
Years ago, few legal vendors had much interest in corporate counsel. Even today, it would seem to make more sense to pursue the 800,000 or so lawyers in private practice than the 100,000 or so in corporations. And plenty of vendors still do that. (
