A good few years ago The Independent ran a weekly column written by fans about their own club, giving a little insight into an aspect of being a supporter. Anyway, I wrote the piece below (over ten years ago!) but never sent it in. I’m not sure how I feel about the sentiments now (and I may come back to this I guess), but here it is, as written then, for what it’s worth…

Fan’s Eye View: Kilmarnock

I have found that supporting one of Scottish football’s so-called lesser teams has always had it’s advantages. Aside from the fact that I am mercifully detached from the bigoted tub-thumping that shrouds the Old Firm, there are a good many perks.

Getting to see my team at away matches is never much of a problem, season-tickets are still priced within reason, and I enjoy a breed of small-community spirit that has helped me to find optimism in a 6-2 Coca-Cola Cup defeat at Stirling Albion.

The main benefit, though, as I see it, is that onerous expectation is replaced by hope. Not for me the dreadful fear that Rangers may get ten-in-a-row. Not for me the terrible worry that Celtic may stop them. I can just take my place in the stand and hope that Killie play well. Hope that we win. Hope that maybe, just maybe, I’ll have something to celebrate.

Or that’s how it was until 24 May 1997, when, for the first time since 1929, Kilmarnock won the Scottish Cup. Now things have changed.

I can’t actually clearly remember my first time watching Killie. It was at Rugby Park in the seventies – a Wednesday night Cup tie against either Hearts or Dundee Utd. We got beat, I do remember that. So I suppose from the very start I didn’t expect too much from them. At that time Killie were yo-yoing between the top two divisions, a singular Scottish League Championship in season 1964/65 a distant memory and before my time.

My Dad always worked Saturdays so I was restricted to midweek matches and that seemed to suffice at the time. Gradually over the years my attendance record improved and eventually I found myself going to every game – home & away – just in time to witness Killie sink to the lowest ebb in their history.

The reality of relegation to the Second Division was played out on a bitterly cold Tuesday night in Dumfries when we were beaten 3-2 by Queen of the South. My football nadir had been reached. From then on I knew that things, as they say, could only get better. [Ed - reading this now it suggests we were relegated on that Tuesday; that's not what I meant. It was this particular game that summed up the depression of the time for me.]

And that’s the whole point of following a team like Kilmarnock isn’t it? You see the bad times as a means of penance. You are doing your time to pay for the small crumbs of success which come your way: a glorious Quarter-final Cup defeat, a nail-biting promotion to the Premier League; a spirited fight against the drop; another Ayrshire Cup. But you don’t dare dream that one day your team may actually win something of any significance. Do you?

Well, as I said, last year we did. Incredulous as it may sound, Kilmarnock are the reigning Tennants Scottish Cup holders.

So this season we headed undaunted into the bright lights of the Cup-Winners’ Cup. Suddenly, there were new dreams: a trip to the Nou Camp or a visit to Rugby Park by a swaggering Chelsea.

I was reminded, however, that Barcelona had washed their hands of the competition, having found a golden ticket to the Money Factory, the Champions’ League, in a chocolate bar. There was still a chance of Gianfranco Zola attempting to outwit Ray Montgomerie, though. (The fact that you probably don’t know who Ray Montgomerie is tends to underline the surreality of this possibility).

As it turned out we drew Irish part-timers Shelbourne whom we finally overcame 3-2 on aggregate. The glamour started and finished in our pairing with Nice of the French Second Division.

In France we were gubbed 3-1, which was followed by a 1-1 draw at home. The photos are pasted in a scrapbook under the headline “So near, yet so far…”. Cue end of  romance.

All of this, as you have gathered, has left me in a bit of a flap. You see, last May I experienced the most exciting, fulfilling, emotional day of my footballing life. I saw something which I had dreamed about, but did not really expect ever to see.

That day, the long trips to Glebe Park and Boghead seemed worthwhile, as if they meant something. I felt that my devotion, persistence and endurance had in some small way played its part in our Cup victory.

But since that day watching Killie hasn’t quite been the same. Sure, I still go to every game. I still care deeply about the club and am proud to be a supporter. Despite this though, something is missing. The hope is gone. I’ve seen us win the Cup. I’ve seen the best Killie victory I’m ever likely to see. No game will ever compare.

Unless we win the league, that is.

I’ve been digging through some old files and came across various bits of writing I’ve done that may (or may not!) merit an airing on here. I’ve added a few more Killie U21 reports from days of yore and below is the first of a few general articles I’ll post up. This first appeared in the Killie Hippo issue 50…

Original Thinking

Like many fans, for me the League Cup has lost much of its lustre. As competitions go, it’s a tired beast and since it no longer offers its winner a UEFA cup place, in a football sense it’s ultimately pointless. This is reflected in low crowds, almost no television or radio coverage, and consequently minimal sponsorship. Managers and players see it as little more than an irritation or, at best, a chance to dabble in idiotic team formations. For the Old Firm, winning it only sheepishly marks the first part of a possible treble – it has no merit on its own. It’s time it was scrapped. The fact that Killie have never won it may or may not be influential in my opinion….

But what to replace it with? Some people – particularly those of a “big-club” persuasion who constantly moan about players being over-played – may argue that the blank spaces created in the fixture calendar should be left unfilled. Supporters and custodians of smaller clubs, for whom the League Cup at least offers the opportunity of additional income, would quite rightly argue the opposite. But these, I think, are typical of the parochial arguments we so often make of football in Scotland. When considering innovations in our game perhaps we should be looking as far as Australian Rugby League for inspiration.

The annual State of Origin series in Australia is an interstate three game series between Queensland and New South Wales. It is one of Australia’s biggest sporting events, and highest rating television programmes, and is played to sell-out crowds. To understand what relevance this has for Scottish football it is important to understand how this series became the success it is.

Since its inception in 1908, Australian Rugby League has held an interstate championship between Queensland and New South Wales (the two states where this code is played). Up until 1981 each team drew its players from the clubs based in that state. No notice was taken of the state origin of the players themselves. Historically, New South Wales dominated this match and peculiarly, given the current talk of Super Casinos at Ibrox and other stadia, a change to gambling laws in that state in 1956 cemented their domination. It was at this time that gaming machines (I think we’d call them puggies!) were legalised in New South Wales clubs providing them with vast new revenue. As the clubs grew stronger so did their pull on the best players from rival Queensland clubs and the interstate matches became a no contest. Years of debate ensued on how to address this inequality and the pivotal moment arrived in 1980.

With Queensland already 2-nil down in the series the game’s administrators, taking the lead from the rival code’s Australian Rules’ State of Origin games between Western Australia and Victoria, announced that the third match in the series would be based on new selection rules, i.e. players playing for the state they originally played in as juniors. Many, especially in the New South Wales media, were sceptical of this and the usual modest crowd of 5,000 was predicted. Yet the Queensland supporters, given the chance to see the first fair interstate contest in years, responded; 35,000 of them turned up to see their team win 20-10 and Rugby League’s State of Origin was born.

The reasons for the State of Origin’s success are apparent. The players and supporters are passionate about their home state, the two teams are competing on an even basis, and there is unpredictability to the outcome. These seem to me like ingredients much of Scottish football is currently sadly lacking.

Could a similar model work in Scottish football? I’m positive it would. In practical terms, I would suggest something along the lines of the following. Scotland could be divided into six regions, say: Highlands, Islands & the North; Stirlingshire, Perthshire & Tayside; Edinburgh & the Borders; Glasgow; Lanarkshire; and Ayrshire & South of Scotland. Not perfect, perhaps, but a good starting point. Teams would play each other once in a mini league format with the finishing top two teams playing at Hampden in a one-off final. There would be other considerations such as choices of venue for matches, appointing of managers etc, however nothing that couldn’t be sorted out.

In the State of Origin today players are selected according to which of the two States they first played in at junior level. The player doesn’t have to have been born in that state, although they usually were. When applying this model to Scottish football, I would be in favour of taking the selection criteria a step further and limiting the regional teams to players born there thus negating the advantage – at least in this competition – of certain regions “mopping up” the best players at youth level.

Such a competition is an attractive proposition in many ways. Principally, though, it fulfils two main requirements for an average supporter. Firstly, it gives him an affinity with his team – with the belief that the players have that same affinity by birth even if they no longer play in the area. ”Playing for the jersey” has become a hackneyed expression and a forlorn hope of most fans, however the Australian example suggests that players take immense pride in representing their State. Secondly, with player selection not reliant on finance, it would provide all teams with a fair chance of winning and therefore every supporter a realistic shot at glory.

There are also benefits for the wider game in Scotland. The showcasing of the best in Scottish talent in a competitive environment can only be good for the National side. Indeed, in Australia the State of Origin games are considered as trial matches for selection to the Australian Rugby League side. This goes a long way to ensuring that the games are taken seriously by the players. It should also be viewed as an inclusive competition. The Scotland team receives fanatical support from many people who don’t regularly watch a club side. In the same way I think there is potential for all football fans to feel pride and attachment to a regional team. Furthermore, the increased income generated from the Cup would be fed evenly back into the game across the whole of Scotland.

Not much gets off the ground these days without the correct marketing. This competition would be a marketers dream. There are six new strips to be designed and sold for a start! There are team names (and, indeed, a competition name) to come up with. The novelty alone would ensure decent exposure in the media and the “product”, if we have to talk of it in those terms, could surely be packaged a lot easier on TV and radio than the League Cup.

Undoubtedly there are some obstacles to such a competition, however. Regional sides would no doubt create “club v county” conflicts, though, provided the games are given sufficient prominence this shouldn’t prove too much of an issue. In any case, the “big teams” that do most of the moaning in this regard don’t exactly play with many Scots anyway! The usual topics of injury payments etc would crop up, but these issues are already dealt with at National level.

The most interesting challenge, I think, would be the uniting of normally rival supporters under a common cause. As a Kilmarnock supporter would I sit side by side with an Ayr fan cheering on the Ayrshire & South Scotland whatevers (no, I can’t think of a name)? I have to say yes. Under this circumstance I’d be no more at odds with another fan than if I was at Hampden supporting Scotland. Whether they spent their Saturdays normally watching Stranraer, Queen of the South, Cumnock or Largs Thistle wouldn’t matter. What would matter is that they, like me, would want us to beat those Weegie bastards from up the road.

Some fans may see such a competition as the first step on a slippery slope to mergers and regionalised super clubs – I don’t see it like that. The identity of individual clubs within Scotland is too strong to accommodate such a move, and long may that be the case. Remember, too, that the State of Origin approach is based on a different premise: the team is made from players from a region – the club that player plays for is irrelevant to all but the small-minded.

It is worth noting that a similar competition was played for many years in English Rugby League, but latterly with limited success. This was the “War of the Roses” match between Yorkshire and Lancashire that ran from 1895 to 1989 with player eligibility based on region of birth and where they first played professionally. It was revived in 2001 under the name of the Origin Series, inspired by the success of the State of Origin matches in Australia, however it ceased two years later due to poor crowds.

Whilst this does cast doubt over the viability of an Origin-based competition in football, I think the ultimate failure of the English competition was due to it not fulfilling a need at the time. Both counties have successful rugby league teams, therefore supporters on both sides are no strangers to success. Furthermore, the league game had already experienced a successful re-branding with the Super League concept.

There is no doubt that the introduction of an Origin-type Cup to Scottish football would require a significant leap of faith. Yet, fundamentally, Scottish football doesn’t like change. The game’s administrators are frightened of change. Supporters, whether they care to admit it or not, are frightened of change. And when change does occur, more often than not it is only to the benefit of the few, with little regard for the game as a whole. This attitude – more than anything else – must be removed from our game for it to prosper. Its prevalence is why we have out-dated, stagnant competitions like the League Cup. Embracing innovation in our game – whilst rediscovering some of its ideology – may yet remind us why we cared so much in the first place.

In any case, whatever the outcome of such an experiment, it would have to be better than spending a Tuesday night in September losing to Ayr, Airdire, Alloa or Brechin….

Thought I should give a mention to the Buy Stirling Albion campaign. The guys behind this should be commended. It’s nice to see folks trying to bolster a community club when so many, including Killie for example, are struggling financially. Whether they ultimately achieve their goal remains to be seen but I wish them a lot of luck. Head over to the website for more info.

So, back to my experiences with Ruby on Rails….

In Part 3, I went through the steps needed to get all the Rails environment components installed and this seemed to go OK. Before building any application I made sure that the MySQL server was running. This can be done in OSX clicking on the System Preferences and (under “Other”) opening up the MySQL control. To start it up you will need your Admin password (you can also set the service to start on boot up too if you want).

To create that first application in Rails, then, open Terminal and navigate to a suitable folder (in the first instance I used the /usr/local/src folder):

computer:~ user$ cd /usr/local/src

and then create the application (called “testapp” here):

computer:/usr/local/src user$ rails testapp

A whole load of files are produced at this point and will scroll by your eyes in Terminal. Don’t worry too much about what they all are at this stage, though. I didn’t! Next changed directory to testapp and ran:

computer:/usr/local/src user$ cd testapp
computer:/usr/local/src/testapp user$ script/server

Helpfully, this gave the following error:

Rails requires RubyGems >= 0.9.4 (you have 0.9.2). Please 'gem update --system' and try again.

So back we go…

computer:/usr/local/src/testapp user$ cd..
computer:/usr/local/src/ user$ gem update --system

And off it runs but not so as you’d think…

Updating RubyGems...
Bulk updating Gem source index for: http://gems.rubyforge.org
Attempting remote update of rubygems-update
ERROR: While executing gem ... (Gem::GemNotFoundException)
Could not find rubygems-update (>0) in any repository

Well that’s not good! A bit of internet searching and I’m onto this:

curl -0 http://files.rubyforge.mmultiworks.com/rubygems/rubygems-0.9.4.tgz

… and the update of Ruby Gems seems complete (at the time of writing the various package versions have moved on a little but I’ll stick with documenting what I did for now).

Before returning to the testapp it came to my attention that Rails 2.0.2 uses sqlite instead of MySQL (see: http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/12/17/rails-2-0-2-some-new-defaults-and-a-few-fixes). You must specify that you want to use MySQL (if indeed you do):

rails testapp -d mysql

Note, don’t open up the app environment before setting up the database and if you make any changes restart the server (see also: http://weblog.rubyonrails.org/2007/12/7/rails-2-0-it-s-done). It was starting to become clear to me (perhaps belatedly) that this move to Rails 2.0 had some changes that the tutorials I’d been reading didn’t cope with.

Firstly, Rails 2.0 does scaffolding differently. There’s a good tutorial at http://fairleads.blogspot.com/2007/12/rails-20-and-scaffolding-step-by-step.html that I followed in this regard. I’ll maybe say more about that in Part 5 (see also: http://www.infoq.com/news/2007/12/rails-20-docs).

I think it’s fair to say that I started out with Rails at a rather inopportune time with texts just slipping out of date in the switch to Rails 2.0 in the development cycle. At the time of writing there’s probably a whole load of stuff of Rails 2.0 so I guess it’s time to revisit where I’d got to and see where this Newbie’s journey goes from here…

Just a wee update to say that I haven’t abandoned my RoR project – I’ve just been a tad busy over the last few weeks. Rest assured Part 4 will be coming along soon. I know you can’t wait…

Looking for parts 1 or 2?

So finally I settled on using Dan Benjamin (Hivelogic)’s method of installing Rails. This promised a set-up on Mac OSX (Tiger) of Ruby, Rails, Subversion (version control), Mongrel (web server) and MySQL (database). There were a couple of pre-requisites detailed that I needed to attend to first.

Firstly, I installed XCode 2.4.1 off the Mac DVD that came with my system. I didn’t do anything beyond complete the installation though. Next I read Dan’s comments on using the /usr/local path for software installs. Some of it flew past me a bit but he did enough to convince me this was the way to go, especially as it appeared his method wouldn’t work if I didn’t! After a couple of false starts I wanted to try and follow the route to the letter. The upshot with this is that Dan states to edit the .bash_login file by adding the following to the end:

export PATH="/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/sbin:/usr/local/mysql/bin:$PATH"

Great I thought, where the Dickens is that? The period at the start of the file name should be a clue as this means it is a hidden file. Turns out showing hidden files on a Mac is no straightforward task (well, not if you don’t know how to do it that is). Anyway, a quick trip to the net told me that the following script is needed (I set this up in Automater):

defaults write com.apple.finder AppleShowAllFiles TRUE
killall Finder

To hide them again you simply run a script as above but with FALSE instead of TRUE. So I did that but no sign of the .bash_login file. Nothing else for it then I just created one in Textedit with the export PATH command as above and saved this to my home folder (no file extension). Checking the permissions on the file, though, shows that I needed to create full read, write and execute permissions on the file (using chmod):

computer:~ user$ ls -l ~/.bash_login
-rw-rw-r-- 1 user user 72 Mar 30 18:38 /Users/user/.bash_login
computer:~ user$ chmod 755 ~/.bash_login
computer:~ user$ ls -l ~/.bash_login
-rwxr-xr-x 1 user user 72 Mar 30 18:38 /Users/user/.bash_login
computer:~ user$

Executing the file just returns the command prompt as expected:

computer:~ user$ ~/.bash_login
computer:~ user$

So groundwork done, on to running the Rails environment install. The full instructions are on Dan’s site so I am not going to unnecessarily repeat them here; I will however point out how each bit went.

Setting Up

Followed this to the letter.

Ruby

Again, followed as instructed. Each step progressed without any errors. I did of course already have Ruby on my system but I still did the Ruby install part (installing 1.8.6 as expected).

RubyGems

As told, not a hitch.

Ruby on Rails

Again no errors, although did notice that Rails 2.0.2 installed (significantly as it turns out later…).

Mongrel

All went fine, selected Ruby version 1.1.4 when prompted.

Subversion

Installed this as instructed (version 1.4.3) although got a warning message in the Terminal:

configure: WARNING: we have configured without BDB filesystem support
You don't seem to have Berkeley DB version 4.0.14 or newer
installed and linked to APR-UTIL. We have created Makefiles which
will build without the Berkeley DB back-end; your repositories will
use FSFS as the default back-end. You can find the latest version of
Berkeley DB here:
http://www.sleepycat.com/download/index.shtml

This didn’t appear to make any difference so I have ignored it for now (but will return to it later I guess).

Capistrano (and termios)

Both installed without a hitch.

MySQL
Obtained the Mac OS X 10.4 (x86) file from mysql.com (version 5.0.51a) and installed as instructed. I also started the server at this point. No problems were encountered.

MySQL Native Bindings Gem

Installed as instructed. I did notice that the latest Ruby version was higher than those listed on Dan’s site, so I selected this (didn’t note what it was though). No problems.

Fix MySQL

Did without a hitch.

And so that was that – everything seemed fine. Thanks Dan! There were a couple of things still not quite right but they only came to light when I tried to set up my first basic application. More on this in Part 4.

Looking for Part 1?

First Steps with Ruby

The system I’m using for web development is a Mac running OSX 10.4.11 (Tiger). Ruby is installed by default in Tiger although it does need some tweaking to work properly with Rails (more of that shortly).

Using Cooper’s book I dived straight into it. Opening up Terminal you can quickly check which version of Ruby you have installed; at the command prompt type

ruby -v

and hit return. This will look something like this…

computer:~ user$ ruby -v
ruby 1.8.6 (2007-03-13 patchlevel 0) [i686-darwin8.11.1]
computer:~ user$

So I’ve got Ruby 1.8.6 installed. It’s pretty easy to mess around with code examples in the Terminal using the Ruby interactive interpreter, “irb”. Enter

irb

and you’ll get:

irb(main):001:0

and you’re off and running. I did this for a bit and learned the basics of the Ruby syntax along the way but to be honest, my impatience was getting the better of me and I wanted to get Rails up and running ASAP.

Installing Ruby on Rails, Part I

You’ve got two main options when installing the Rails framework on Mac OSX; either manually, commonly using the guide provided by Dan Benjamin, or using the single installer Locomotive (although the latter is now finished development as the advent of a fully functional Rails stack in Mac OSX Leopard means it is no longer needed).

The “instant” results of Locomotive looked appealing so I had a go at this first. Downloading the file is straightforward enough, of course, and the install is a simple matter of dragging the package into the Applications folder. Starting up the app you get a control panel. To start a new Rails project, click the down arrow in the bottom left corner and select “Create New”. From there I created a project called “mydiary” in a rails directory of my home folder. So far so easy. Highlight the project in the Locomotive console, click run, and off it goes (it’s still empty of course). Browsing to http://localhost:3000/ gave the “Welcome to Rails” page expected. Beyond this though I became unstuck.

As detailed in both Beginning Ruby and on the Welcome to Rails page, the next thing you need to do is set up your database. With Locomotive installed, I should have MySQL running, but is it? I played about with this for a while and got nowhere near getting a basic app up and running. In truth, too, the Locomotive approach did leave a nagging doubt that I was missing some key understanding along the way.

So I returned to the manual method. I took a quick diversion first to look at Sakuzaku’s script that claims to automate the whole Hivelogic (Dan Benjamin) procedure. This could well be a nice compromise I thought. There’s some telling comments on the blog, however, from Dan himself pouring some rather icy water over doing it this way. I gave it a go though, but it all fell apart at the MySQL install. If you check out Sakuzaku’s page you’ll see mention of a possible MySQL error. This is pretty much what happened to me, but there is no obvious solution. So I ditched that too! There was nothing else for it: over to Hivelogic…

I’ll detail my experiences with Dan’s methods in Part 3.

For various reasons, not least attempting to “Ajaxify” my web design skills, I have embarked upon learning Ruby on Rails. Most, if not all, of this is pretty new to me. I don’t know a great deal (OK, make that nothing) about object-oriented (OO) programming, JavaScript I tend to fly by the seat of pants with (but they tell me Rails will do it all for me…), and the concepts of frameworks and model-view-control patterns are about as alien as wee green men. The philosophy, though, I think I’m pretty comfortable with and I tend to get excited about it so that’s got to be a good thing. Also I think I’ve pretty much cracked XHTML and CSS and the whole web standards and usability thing so I reckon I’m on the right track. So what I intend to do here is track my experiences, both for my own benefit and perhaps to help others who find themselves in the same position as me. There’s a whole host of guides out there (some of which I’ll come to later) but hopefully my insights will add a little flavour to the mix.

So where to start? The thing that struck me at the outset was I didn’t actually know what I didn’t know. That probably doesn’t make sense, but I guess what I mean is I didn’t really know how the things that I did know fitted into the overall jigsaw. So what did I know?

• There’s an object-oriented programming language called Ruby that’s supposed to be cool and easy to learn. Hah!
• There’s a “thing” called Ruby on Rails developed by some genius at 37signals.com which forms the basis of new emerging “web 2.0″ type applications. I even use their Highrise and Backpack apps.
• Ajax (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) makes things even better; the fact that you don’t need page reloads is the killer here. I knew too that there was a seminal article about this somewhere…
• I had a hunch that my previous attempts at learning PHP, Perl and CGI may just have been a waste of time.
• All of this means you can do some really fancy stuff with your web pages (drag and drop anyone?).

Fitting all of this together with my knowledge of (X)HTML, DHTML and CSS was, and still is, the challenge. The first thing I wanted to be clear about was where Ajax fitted into the mix. Jason Cranford Teague’s CSS, DHTML and Ajax was great for this. I’ve followed Jason’s stuff for many years – back to his columns in The Independent in the late 90s – and always found him easy to read. The initial chapters of the book were going over old ground for me, but that was reassuring as I felt I was hitting Ajax at the right level. After reading this I was pretty happy with the connections between page layout using XHMTL and CSS and dynamically serving the content through the Document Object Model (DOM)/JavaScript and the XMLHttpRequest object: the fundamentals of what we know as Ajax. Heh, I’m getting  somewhere.

My next port of call was the official Ruby on Rails site. I skimmed around there for a while looking at site examples etc (I even managed to divert my attention to setting up a shopify.com site) and trying to get some guidance on what books or tutorials I needed. I found why’s (poignant) guide to Ruby pretty good fun and a good place to start learning the basics of OO programming, however I’m a book kinda person so I headed to Amazon.

The reviews on Amazon can be a pretty good indicator to the usefulness of a book, especially in giving an idea of the “level” it is aimed at. The standard textbook for learning Ruby is known as the “pickaxe” book, because it has, erm, a pickaxe on the cover, but Beginning Ruby by Peter Cooper looked a better bet for an OO novice like myself. The pickaxe book is over 3 years old now, too, and I have a general rule of not buying textbooks this old, especially in such a fast-changing environment as web design. So that’s Ruby taken care of. Next up was Ruby on Rails, or just Rails as it is often referred to. There’s a few books on this but Ajax on Rails by Scott Raymond had the appeal of killing two birds with one stone. It’s an O’Reilly book too: you can’t go wrong with O’Reilly.

So these books landed on my doormat the other day and I’ve pretty much finished reading through both of them and I’ve even messed around with Ruby itself for a while using the Ruby interactive interpreter (“irb”) on my Mac; Ruby is installed by default on Mac OS X. But more of that later. At this point I think I may be missing some deeper understanding of both Rails and Ajax but I kind of want to get dirty with some apps under development and then seek further help where I best need it. Agile Web Development with Rails and the brand new Ajax: The Definitive Guide look favourites at the moment. But for now, I’m going to see where I’m at.

Next time (Part 2) I’ll relate my experiences with beginning programming in Ruby and installing Ruby on Rails.

With Killie having an out-of-the-cup day off (and the possibility of taking in the Stirling v Dunfermline game scuppered by a waterlogged pitch), it was interesting to catch the day’s FA Cup matches. So a big well-done to Barnsley who managed to knock out the holders and money-drenched superstars of Chelsea 1-0. Nice to see that good old hard work can overcome the longest of odds. Well done too to Portsmouth who disposed of Man Utd at Old Trafford thanks to some incredible defending and a penalty – taken against stand-in keeper Rio Ferdinand. Old Fergie had a right moan about refs after the game but that’s what he does. The phrase gracious in defeat isn’t one of his favourites.

I’ve just finished reading Meat, the debut horror novel by Joseph D’Lacey, and have to highly recommend it. Plenty of gore and an interesting take on the food-processing debate, even if the central thesis is signposted rather too obviously. A warning though: it may just turn you vegetarian. Check it out at the author’s web site. I look forward to more from this guy.