The Copywriter Underground

I’m a week into my Linux test flight, and Ubuntu is working largely as advertised.

It seems its reputation as a hard-to-use/hard to install OS is outdated – at least for Ubuntu. (For an amusing look at Bill Gates’ take on Windows XP usability, go here).

Over the last few days, I created and shipped a pair of estimates, a couple pieces of copy, a marketing plan, a press release and an invoice (all created in OpenOffice and saved in MS Word format).

Though I asked, I received zero negative feedback from clients about un-openable or malformed documents.

I’m testing a couple twitter clients (Twitterfox & gTwitter), and handling my IM traffic with Pidgin. My blog images are editing nicely in Gimp (a fast open source image editor), and OpenOffice works just like it did when I used it on Windows.

I also edited a pair of landing pages in KompoZer – a WYSIWYG html editor (I use Namo Web Editor in Windows).

I’m less taken with Evolution – the Linux equivalent to Outlook – and may start searching for a calendar/contact manager to pair with Thunderbird.

In short, it’s largely business as usual, only a bit faster. In fact, I’m struck by how easy the transition has been, and how little disruption I’ve experienced.

But then, I already use a lot of open source software. And there have been a few difficulties.

My USB microphone (M-Audio “Podcast Factory”) isn’t playing nice with Ubuntu and Audacity (open source audio editor). It was plug-and-play on Vista (XP required the installation of a truly annoying driver), but I have yet to crack the code on Ubuntu, and don’t have time to invest more than a few minutes.

And my laptop’s display brightness control is far too coarse (no steps between fully bright and too dim).

Finally, I encountered a very, very strange ftp issue, where I couldn’t get files to appear on my server using Filezilla on Linux, yet the exact same settings produced the correct results when using Filezilla on Vista (I’ll troubleshoot this one a bit more).

I like the cleanliness of the Ubuntu interface. And enjoy not having to re-boot the computer after a few hours of intensive program switching (like I did in Windows).

Yes, I’m still pining for a better blog editor. And have yet to find a simple, GUI text editor with realtime character/word/line count stats.

But it’s clear that I could run my business in Linux. But do I want to? And would other writers?

I see three key barriers limiting Linux adoption by rank & file “word workers.”

• Software availability
• Compatibility with client systems
• The “Windows Tax” (PCs arrive with Windows installed, so why switch?)

We’ll look at the second two in subsequent posts; right now, let’s deal with the software question.

Software Availability

Linux fans claim technical superiority for the operating system – a hollow claim if you can’t run the software needed to do your job.

For example, at the right hand of many copywriters lies Microsoft Word – the clear corporate standard and the word processor of choice for many copywriters.

Clearly, if you absolutely must use MS Word, then there’s no reason to run Linux; Word simply isn’t available.

For many copywriters, the story begins and ends right there (though a few will use Word on a Mac).

Still, change is a constant, and the writing world isn’t nearly as MS Word-focused as it has been. In fact, plenty of writers are using anything but MS Word — and without ill effects on their business. Why?

• We’re seeing a growing emphasis on unformatted copy for online use (any text editor can deliver a .txt or .rtf file)
• Modern word processors are far better at saving files in MS Word format
• A powerful, open source alternative to MS Office has emerged (OpenOffice)
• Hosted office suites have arrived (Google Docs, Zoho, etc)
• The latest version of MS Word uses a radically different interface, and not everybody’s happy about that
• Our writing efforts are fragmenting across our desktops (blog editors, twitter & IM clients, email, etc)

I bailed on Word a couple years ago when yet another upgrade arrived – one that actually made the software less useful to me.

I tried OpenOffice, it worked well, I was happy, and I never looked back. I haven’t suffered for the decision.

If I wrote long, technical documents for a corporate client who demanded MS Word compatibility, I don’t know if I’d be similarly happy.

And of course, word processors are only part of the deal.

Clearly, we’re doing more with Web browsers and Java apps every day, but plenty of Windows-only software exists (much of it vertical market), and while I’ve found a serviceable replacement in every “main” category for my Windows software, it’s clear that won’t be true for everyone.

Hardcore Quicken users might find a home in GnuCash, but others won’t. Other problem areas include games, hobby software, some online clients… the list of potential problem software is long.

Linux partisans are quick to point out that Wine offers you the ability to run some Windows programs on the Linux OS, and they’re right – to a point.

The real question is this: why would anyone switch to Linux if it meant running a critical piece of software in emulation?

My time in Linux assures me it’s possible (simple, actually) to run a writing business on Linux. The lack of viruses, the automatic (and daily updates), the low cost, the performance, the stability, the support, and the total absence of Microsoft looking over your shoulder (anyone enjoy downloading the Windows Software Validation tool?) are pluses.

But the absence of some software is a minus. How much of a minus?

That depends wholly on your perspective. Newer writers – with less time and data invested in legacy software – should find it a lot easier.

I’ll delve into the other barriers to Linux adoption — and a few reasons why you should consider Linux — in an upcoming post. Right now, I’m packing for two weeks of fly fishing in Montana, where I’ll be writing and filing blog reports from my Linux-equipped laptop.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.Technorati Tags: linux, ubuntu, ubuntu project, openoffice,

My six year-old HP laptop has never failed me. But lately, it has been making me wait.

It’s running Windows XP, and even after a clean install – once its 512K MB of RAM was burdened with service packs, security updates, anti-viral software and a modern browser - it becomes the Little Laptop That Can’t.

At least not quickly.

It’s not the end of the world; I run my company on a fast new laptop. But I keep the HP upstairs, so I can surf and check email without heading downstairs to my office.

Was I screwed? Time to shell out for another laptop?

Maybe. But when you’ve got nothing to lose, you’ve got nothing to lose by trying something new. I went looking for a faster alternative. And found it.

The Linux Story

Linux is an operating system that runs many of the servers on the Web (this blog’s server runs Linux).

Linux is also available for the desktop, yet it’s rarely found on the information worker’s PC (desktop market share has grown to just over 2%).

A free version of the age-old Unix operating system, Linux is considered an operating system for techies, scientists and cranks. It’s fast and powerful, but often labeled “user unfriendly.”

Yet recently I’ve heard the rumblings. The newer versions are “friendlier.” Easier to install. Cuddly even.

True? Or false?

I’m no propeller head. But I am a good test subject. I’m a marketer, copywriter and online guy. And I don’t mind tinkering (a little).

In short, I use a PC the same way most online-savvy folks use PCs. And here I sat with a slow laptop; a perfect test bed for a Linux installation.

The Ubuntu Effect

Among all the Linux distributions, Ubuntu has been called the friendliest, easiest-to-install Linux distribution. That made it my starting point.

Which is when I experienced my first Linux Surprise.

Ubuntu isn’t one system; it’s many of them.

Several flavors are available, including a server version, an education version (Edubuntu), two “standard” desktop versions (Ubuntu & Kubuntu), an interesting studio version for multimedia types (Ubuntu Studio), a mobile version, and yes – a small footprint version for slower PCs (Xubuntu).

Bingo.

Installation was straightforward; I downloaded an Xubuntu CD image, burned a CD, and rebooted from the Xubuntu CD.

Expecting a painful confrontation with an extraterrestrial installation process, I was pleasantly surprised. Instead of indecipherable choices, I faced four installation options:

• Install the Linux operating system over the old system (reformatting your drive and destroying all your old data)
• Install Ubuntu in its own partition (it divides your hard drive into separate virtual disks; you decide which operating system boots at startup)
• Install it on on your Windows disk (maintains all your Windows data and system; Linux runs a little slower)
• Run it from the CD (quite slow, but you can test-drive the system without altering one byte on your Windows disk)

Because I didn’t care about maintaining my old Windows XP installation, I went with option #1.

And gritted my teeth.

This was where it was going to get messy.

This was where I was going to meet the Linux Monster head on.

This was… done already?

Installation went smoothly. Very smoothly.

The only holdup? The wireless card didn’t work, so I had to plug my laptop directly into my router. It connected immediately, and automatically downloaded the driver software for my wireless card.

Done. Finished.

Ready to compute.

In other words, installation was easy. Damned easy.

In 40 minutes, I was looking at the Xubuntu desktop, complete with open source (free) word processor (Abiword), spreadsheet (Gnumeric), Pidgin all-in-one IM software, and plenty other goodies.

Still, I’m a fan of OpenOffice (an open source, MS Windows Office equivalent), and installing it was a snap.

I simply ran the Package Manager, which automatically downloaded and installed software for me.

Fast. Simple. Easy.

What was I afraid of again?

With a little configuring (the browser had to download some non-open source plugins to run flash), my old laptop was once again a useful Web surfing tool.

It isn’t blazingly fast, but it is faster than when running XP, and Xubuntu handled my laptop’s limited memory far better.

The interface is clean and simple. Upgrades and updates are automatic. And yes, there was much rejoicing at the Underground.

The End of the Story?

Not quite. Running (and yes, enjoying) the streamlined version of Ubuntu forced me to ask the question: would I prefer the full-featured desktop version of Ubuntu to the copy of Windows Vista running on my business laptop?

I’ll be blunt. I don’t much like Windows Vista. It makes my fast new laptop run like my old slow desktop. In fact, it feels like little more than a slow, tarted-up version of Windows XP – and many of the interface “improvements” leave me scratching my head.

It doesn’t feel like an upgrade worth waiting years for. And I have zero interest in moving to the latest version of MS Office. In fact, my daily software set is already largely open source.

Wtih that in mind, was Ubuntu a faster, updated-more-often, better-designed choice for my everyday work computer? Was it possible to find out in a relatively painless fashion?

The Ubuntu Project: 30 Days of Linux

Turns out it was. I installed the full-blown glossy version of Ubuntu in a partition on my new Dell Inspiron laptop (total: two hours).

Most the software I wanted was already in place, but I quickly downloaded the few bits that weren’t (the big list looks like: OpenOffice, Firefox, Thunderbird, Evolution, Audacity, Kompozer, Scribus, Gimp, gTwitter).

Ubuntu running all the usual suspects: OpenOffice, Firefox, gTwitter, IM manager…

Some are simply Linux versions of the software I already use. Others (like HTML editor Kompozer) replace commercial Windows products.

Meanwhile, Vista – and all my old software – reclines on my hard drive, ready to boot if needed.

Like Morgan Spurlock of “30 days” fame, I’m going to live with Ubuntu Linux for the next month.

If I like it, I switch. If I don’t, Vista stays.

First Impressions

Ubuntu is faster than Vista. Not by a factor of several times, but noticeably faster.

The interface is (to my eye) cleaner. And I’m already using mostly open source software, which means I barely notice the switch.

There have been glitches.

Playing a standard commercial DVD wasn’t possible without messing with indecipherable command lines. It’s an easy fix, but it’s clumsy. And while there’s a lot of open source software available, Linux currently lacks a killer blog editor.

I loved Windows LiveWriter on Vista, but have been relegated to using the oddly designed ScribeFire (Firefox-based Java app) for blogging. (Don’t Linux people blog?)

I already miss some of the peripheral software available in Windows. Like the Twhirl Twitter editor and the Q10 “dark screen” text editor.

And moving contact data from my Windows PIM (Time & Chaos) and into Evolution (the open source equivalent of Outlook) has been a surprisingly painful experience.

Outside of the few glitches, I’ve enjoyed an easy move. And with Web-based software becoming more common, the application barriers to moving to Linux are going to come down (in most cases, they already have).

Of course, larger questions of availability, scalability, compatibility and even philosophy are at work here, and I’ll get into those during my month-long Ubuntu test.

Until then, keep writing.

Technorati Tags: ubuntu, xubuntu, linux, linux for copywriters, vista, windows vista, windows xp, trying linux, trying ubuntu, testing ubuntu, open source, openoffice

As Web 2.0 fanatics, we’re always searching for our next online time waster, and Wordle might be one of the best.

You cut and paste text into the box, and it generates a “word cloud” based on word usage (often-used words are shown bigger).

This next is the Wordle of my most-read post — my Value-Added Copywriter Manifesto:

It’s fun and it’s addictive, and damnit, I’m going to use it to promote myself to my clients. I don’t know how (well, I’ve got a few ideas), but I will.

Keep Wordle-ing writing, Tom Chandler.

While they’re only paying $10/hour, this MediaBistro ad tells us Mahalo’s looking for writers who:

Candidates must be excellent writers capable of writing perfect copy at a fast pace. Familiarity with online research, journalism, and wiki markup language are all definite pluses.

It’s always heartwarming to see an American tech company attempting to pay offshore prices for onshore work, but then again, this is hardly new.

To some, “Web 2.0″ is about interactivity and connectedness. To others, it’s a license to profit from the intellectual work product of others, and those leading the rush to trample intellectual property rights are often technology companies.

Will this intellectual property land rush subside? Obviously, not as long as “writers” are willing to work for poverty level wages, or even worse, trading work for “exposure” when that exposure can’t really be translated to a living wage.

There have always been the Users and the Used. Don’t be one of the latter.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.

(hat tip to Valleywag)

Garry Kasparov is the greatest chess player the world’s ever known. While few of us can replicate his impressive mental powers, we can leverage the methods he used to achieve the chess world’s highest ever rating.

His secret?

He played the game backwards.

A Strategy For Success

Most chess players view a game’s current position as a starting point, and simply search for ways to improve their position.

Kasparov’s method turned that thinking upside down. According to chess writer Jacob Aagaard, Kasparov envisioned what he wanted to see on the chessboard – creating a “fantasy” position in his head - and then calculated a way to make that fantasy chess position a reality.

The result was the highest rating ever achieved by a chess player, and an unparalleled run as world champion.

Chess teacher Jeremy Silman outlined a similar method in his hugely successful chess training book, so clearly, it’s an idea with legs.

The parallel for marketers and copywriters is plain.

You can invest your energy incrementally improving your current situation (your life, your business, your latest campaign).

Or you can decide where you want to be, then find a way to make it happen.

The difference is subtle. But significant.

One method moves you forward, but slowly.

The other finds you working towards your dream situation.

The Application of Fantasy

What do you really want to write? Who do you want to work for? What kind of work situation would you like?

Construct that situation in your head. And then figure out what it takes to make it happen.

To help, I’m offering you the design for a simple worksheet – something I adapted from a leadership workshop I attended years ago.

It’s simple and effective. You simply outline the current situation in the lowest box (Now). Then create your fantasy scenario in the top box (the Wow).

What then becomes apparent are the steps in the middle – the things you need to do to make your situation come true (the How).

Write down the steps, editing out those that aren’t truly necessary or don’t move you towards your goal.

What’s left is a simple set of steps that lead you to your fantasy situation.

Best part? You can use this simple worksheet to complete short-term goals, or even while taking individual steps towards your larger goal.

It’s a simple idea, but one that turns most people’s thinking upside down.

Figure out where you really want to be, and only then figure out how to get there.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.

As a writing techno-geek of the worst kind, I admit to a fascination with the tools we use to write.

That’s why I’ve added an interesting new writing blog to my RSS Reader: The Writer’s Technology Companion.

Articles about PayPal, podcasts, interesting new word processors and other technology mingle with industry information and plenty of "How to" headlines.

I added it to my RSS reader, and now I’m on with my day.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.

I just finished a conversation with a client who wanted to send me money. Sadly, they expect me to perform a written act of marketing before sending a check, and they wanted a project estimate.

Long ago, I made a rule to never give off-the-cuff estimates on complex projects.

Perhaps I do it badly (perhaps everyone does), but I grew tired of burning myself — typically the result of forgetting a time-intensive aspect of a project.

So I did what I always do; fired up my project checklist/estimate spreadsheet, and started moving through the list.

Money, after all, matters, which leads me to wonder; could the spreadsheet be the successful freelance writer’s most important piece of software?

Words Matter, But So Do Numbers.

Writers have long fought wars (with a religious zeal) over word processors, and for good reason.

When you sit down at the keyboard and open up that vein, the interface between you and your now-manifesting neurosis should be a smooth one.

Still, in all the glitz, angst and fervor heaped by writers on word processors, I think writers don’t give the humble, non-flashy spreadsheet its due.

I use OpenOffice — the Open Source (free) equivalent to Microsoft’s Office suite. While I never use the included spreadsheet software at anywhere near its full potential, I use it often:

• Invoices
• Estimates
• Job tracking
• Job planning/project schedules
• Checklists
• Analysis

On complex jobs, I often put together a spreadsheet-based timeline accompanied by a checklist.

Estimating projects on a spreadsheet allows you to run a bazillion different pricing scenarios.

Where spreadsheets really shine is in analysis — both project/response data and when conducting “what if” scenarios.

Do higher offers really result in better response rates (not always, and without a spreadsheet, how do you know what the optimal offer is)? What can we spend on trade show promotion? What’s the lifetime value of our average customer?

In fact, learn to use pivot tables, and I guarantee that no question will ever go unanswered again*.

Years ago, my most-reliable, client-butt-saving direct mail tool was the breakeven spreadsheet, where — rather than try to predict a response rate — I figured out what response was needed for a program to break even.

If that rate was too high, the program was in trouble before it started — and the client received a warning before it was too late. They weren’t always happy, but they weren’t poorer either.

A spreadsheet also taught me the value of incremental improvements when dealing with large mailing lists, and once saved me from making a very, very bad royalty deal (I was assuming most of the risk and getting little of the reward).

When I was writing and submitting articles to trade magazines for a client, I used (you guessed it) a spreadsheet to track submissions. It even reminded me when it was time to follow up.

How could I not like something that’s meant so much to my business?

Easy to Use. And Easy to Get.

Microsoft Excel sits atop the heap of spreadsheets, though if you don’t own MS Office, don’t despair; OpenOffice offers a spreadsheet that’s largely compatible with Excel, and you can download it (for Linux, Mac & Windows) free.

There are other choices available, but if you must look beyond powerful & expensive (Excel) and power & free (OpenOffice), feel free to do so.

For example, Google Docs and Zoho both offer an online spreadsheet, though I’m not overkeen on the sometimes sluggish response.

Whatever tool you chose, you might struggle with a piece of software that’s a bit more linear than most writers are used to.

Given the flood of data washing over most marketers, a spreadsheet is a powerful tool against (what I call) data blindness; the inability to see the forest for all the burning trees.

Give a spreadsheet a little time - and download a few of the bazillion templates available on the Internet - and you’ll have a lifelong friend (and revenue-enhancing business partner).

Keep writing, Tom Chandler

(*Not a guarantee)

Technorati Tags: copywriting,freelance copywriting,copywriter,spreadsheet,microsoft excel,microsoft office,open office,google docs,zoho

You read the headline correctly; at one point in the recent past, Dell Computers employed as many as 800 separate marketing agencies.

And here I wondered why their marketing had gone so bland.

Imagine the turf battles. Imagine the complexity. Imagine the egos.

Now imagine the difficulty you’d have pushing even a brilliant idea through that mess.

Valleywag offers a typically snarky look at the situation — where Dell cast off its multitudes, signed a $4.5 billion contract with ad giant WPP, and asked them to essentially create a single-client ad agency:

Why is Dell taking a beating from HP? One reason may be that it didn’t apply its vaunted supply-chain techniques to its marketing. Before asking WPP to create a single-client ad agency just for Dell, the PC maker worked with 800 advertising agencies around the world. [News.com]

Never underestimate the power of a small team of individuals working together. It’s typically how great work gets done.

And never, ever underestimate the power of a mob (or a series of self-interested mobs) to blunt even the best work, which is precisely what Dell was experiencing.

While Dell’s situation was largely its own making, their situation reflects the fragmentation of an industry where we used to deal with only a small handful of media channels (TV, radio, print).

Organizations now face the need for specialists in everything from SEO to viral to rich media to engagement to “traditional” copywriting.

In fact, Dell needs all that just to power their own Web site:

Ad agencies are scrambling to integrate a lot of new technologies and disciplines, all while maintaining the aura of invincibility that agencies wear like armor. They’re taking a few lumps, and having worked at a few, would guess they’re in for a few more.

I’ve only been at this for two decades, but I can’t imagine a more interesting time to be in marketing.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.

Technorati Tags: dell,advertising agency,marketing

[Update: Amusingly, Twitter's been very unhappy since I posted this, and suggesting it's in the midst of a meltdown wouldn't be out of line...]

You can’t help but hear the drumbeats about Twitter. Depending on who’s talking, it’s either a colossal waste of time, or humanity’s last, greatest hope.

I’ve used Twitter for months now as a simple micro-blogging sidebar on my Trout Underground fly fishing blog. In that relatively undemanding capacity (and helped along by Alex King’s excellent Twitter Tools), it worked fine, though hardly perfectly.

Recently I tumbled for a personal Twitter account to see about all the fuss.

Well, I tried to see.

Seems like the service is down a lot. In fact, as I write this — having just shipped a messaging platform advocating a radical repositioning of a client’s product (something I was willing to crow about) — I can’t log on.

Can’t tweet. Can’t do anything. (I wrote this yesterday. Today — right now — we seem to be experiencing another temporary outage).

While not everything about Twitter is trivial, it’s clear that most tweets aren’t exactly life-changing, which is precisely why the service needs to work flawlessly.

The Experiment Continues

Still, I’m going to continue the Twitter experiment.

You can find me there hiding behind a ChandlerWrites address.

I invite you to follow along, and I promise not to clog the pipelines with “shorts or sweatpants?” subject matter.

After all, I initially “followed” a lot of people in an attempt to quickly gain perspective. And the noise level was… high. Too high.

I find Twitter an interesting idea. Perhaps once I’m following the right people, the light bulb will come on. And regardless of of whether it sticks, you have to do these things to speak about them with your clients.

Still, Twitter feels more like a proof of concept — a proving ground for something better that has yet to evolve.

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.

Technorati Tags: twitter,tweets,copywriting

Prior to my family emergency, I promised you the results of my recent new client pitch — the culmination of several posts about picking and pitching the clients you want to work for (instead of letting clients pick you).

We started back here — the post where I suggested getting your foot in the door of high-value clients via a lumpy mailer.

Lumpy mailers have gotten a bad rap; some feel they’re misleading (a sheet of bubble wrap in credit card mailers is generating bad press), but in this case, we’re delivering something of value (even if it’s just fun), and I’ve never once heard a complaint.

In the age of badly written email and hair-trigger attention spans, a lumpy mailer is pure power.

This time I sent two high-value prospects a pair of chattering teeth (yes, it’s a communications theme, and yes — I have a box of the things sitting on a shelf).

Attached to the teeth was a card laying out the benefits of my proposed program.

One prospect immediately called for a meeting, and last Friday, we met.

I pitched an engagement/membership program, and at first, the client was skeptical. Then she grew very interested.

Frankly, you have to be prepared for this; unlike the clients who seek you out — presumably after identifying a need for your services — prospecting on your own means pitching people who don’t necessarily think they need your help.

In short, the prospect requires a little education, and you don’t have much time to do the educating.

In this case, the client liked what she heard. At the risk of bragging, I wasn’t that surprised.
Copywriters often fear they have little to offer (it’s the most common fear among newer copywriters).

They’re typically wrong about that, but in my case, I’m very comfortable pitching engagement marketing to marketing professionals. This client responded to that pitch.

How do I know?

For starters, our one-hour meeting ran 2.5 hours, and the walk back to the office (from the cafe) was repeatedly interrupted by stops (she wanted to go over more possibilities).

I didn’t walk away with a signed work order, but I’m now the proud owner of a prospect deeply interested in the kind of project I want to write — one who asked me for a detailed proposal.

How about you; have you picked a small handful of clients you want to work for and then pitched them?

If not, why not?

Let me help; take 60 seconds to sit down and hand-write a list of the four companies/organizations/causes you’d kill to work for.

There. You just started the process. I already laid out the next few steps. So what are you waiting for?

Keep writing, Tom Chandler.