The Art of Brewing at Home

Since moving to Pittsburgh and patronizing fantastic local craft breweries as well as sampling outstanding imports from countries like Germany and Belgium, I have come to enjoy beer in the way others enjoy fine wines. Perhaps it was inevitable that I would be drawn to homebrewing. If you are curious about trying it yourself, here is a rundown of my forays into the art and science of brewing.

The first beer I brewed was a Belgian wit; I used a “no-boil kit” in which the wort—the mixture of malts and adjuncts that eventually ferments into beer—was already created and sold to me in cans. All I had to do was add water and yeast, then wait. While easy and fun, it was not true homebrewing; I had very little control over the strength of the beer, the types of hops being used, and the strains of yeast. The science was already done. Like a paint-by-numbers creation, no-boil homebrews can be a great place to start but are not something you would show to your friends as an example of your artistic skill.

After a year or two, I bought a full set of supplies (a brewing vessel, a bottle capper, some measuring devices, and other such items) and prepared for my first real homebrew. Again, I bought a kit with a recipe, but the wort had to be created from scratch this time. I steeped my grains, mixed in liquid malt, added the hops, and timed my boil to ensure the mixture was properly prepared for fermentation. Three weeks later, I had two cases of a homebew Oatmeal stout. It wasn’t fantastic, but friends and family enjoyed every last bottle.

I have done three batches since then, all of different styles: a Belgian Strong Pale Ale, an Imperial Stout, and, my most recent composition, a Bavarian Dunkelweizen. All are ales, which require a week or two for one fermentation cycle at around 65 degrees Fahrenheit, with the yeast fermenting from the top of the beer down. In contrast, lagers require colder temperatures and longer fermentation periods, with the yeast fermenting from the bottom up. To do lagers (eventually), I will need a refrigerator devoted to nothing but brewing.

For now, I am very satisfied with ales. It is fun to try to recreate the tastes and appearances of some favorite beers while also adding my own little touch. For my Dunkelweizen—a German or Bavarian ale that uses wheat along with or in place of barley as the main malt—I created an experimental recipe. Here is a step-by-step view of the two-week process , with a few recipe secrets.

Homebrewing requires a lot of patience, but pays off when you open the first bottle of a new batch and find it to your liking. Depending on the strength, your beer can be stored for months or years. Because a small amount of yeast remains in suspension in homebrewed ales, it is a “live beer” and its taste can evolve over time. Very strong beers can change drastically over the course of a few years. So I try to put aside a few bottles of each batch, letting it mature (fingers crossed) like a fine vintage.

Choosing the Right Open-Source CMS

Creating your own website once required a basic working knowledge of HTML. No longer. Thanks to the rise of content management systems (CMS) in the past decade, the heavy lifting is handled for you. But how do you choose the right CMS for your situation? Here are some observations.

Back in the mid 90s — when WYSIWIGs barely existed — I built my first site on a small, free AOL space. (The design was terrible, but I take some pride in the fact that I opted to avoid flashing or scrolling text.) AOL’s built-in WYSIWIG helped with text and pictures but left me floundering in HTML for anything remotely stylish.

Today, WYSIWIGs like Dreamweaver have advanced light years (although they still produce inefficient markup). Now you can build a website like my first one in a quarter of the time, with twice as much content, and NOT have it look like a stream of semi-consciousness.

Dreamweaver is fine for building a simple site featuring text, pictures, audio, and colors. But expectations have risen. We now want embedded video, intricate styling, and interactivity like comments on a blog or posts in forum threads. These features require server-side scripting and database management not available through Dreamweaver, or at least not easily accessible to the novice.

Enter CMS, which manages this kind of programming and puts a nice, user-friendly graphical user interface (GUI) on it. Instead of writing object-oriented code and database queries, you simply click buttons and drag and drop content in a web-based application. Using a CMS will significantly increase the efficiency with which you can add, modify, and remove content from your website, and will make an otherwise technologically exclusive skill accessible to the average user.

Some CMS applications have to be paid for, but others are open-source, which basically means you can use them for free (although hosting typically costs something) and to customize them to your tastes. Among the dozens of CMS applications, those most widely recognized by web enthusiasts are WordPress, Drupal, and Joomla!

While most popular open-source CMS are written in PHP and interact with a MySQL database, no two are exactly alike. You can’t just pick anything off the shelf and get your desired result. Also, a CMS is never going to meet your exact needs right out of the box; you’ll probably need to install at least one custom template and a number of plugins (sometimes called modules, components, or blocks) to realize your site’s full potential.

Choosing the optimal CMS for your website requires having a pretty good idea from the outset exactly what range of features you will offer to users. Are you better off with a more targeted CMS like WordPress, or something more generic like Joomla! or Drupal? The former is primarily meant to host blogs, while the latter two are meant for fully-featured websites that may or may not include blogs. That doesn’t mean you can’t use Joomla! or Drupal for only blogs or that WordPress can’t be made to host a great website with additional features beyond a blog. But the easier path is to start with the CMS that is closest to your final vision. WordPress can make a nice website, but a lot of the things that come built-in on a website CMS are not included in WordPress, so you’ll find yourself hunting for plugins early on. Joomla! on the other hand doesn’t feature a very intuitive blogging system out of the box and is hit or miss on some of its plugins, but its standard package is very well done. Drupal offers great performance and good features, but some users find it to have the least intuitive control panel of the three. Drupal has the best plugin library of almost any CMS I am familiar with, yet it offers the greatest challenge in terms of installing them.

Another pitfall to avoid is choosing the wrong version of your CMS. CMS development teams are constantly releasing new versions and patches, and your intuition might be to go with the latest version available when it comes time to set up your CMS. This can be a mistake. WordPress has a particularly reliable community when it comes to supporting new updates quickly, but this isn’t true of other platforms, and as part of your research you should try to feel out how much support a given version of a CMS is getting. Is a newer version just on the horizon? Does the community gripe about features of the current version? Do some of them swear by previous iterations? If so, consider either holding off (if you can) until the next version comes out and gets a thorough test from the community, or step back to the previous version and try it.

In truth, it is hard to make a complete disaster out of an open-source CMS. Because the open-source community only supports a CMS that they have tried and come to trust, you’re not going to stumble across one that doesn’t have at least a moderately reliable architecture and a devoted community constantly developing new features and plugins. So whatever you pick, the community will be there to help and with enough perseverance, you’ll have a proper website up and running in a relatively short time period, even if you are working alone. But looking before leaping can only help. Whether you’re considering the three I mentioned above, or you are looking to try another CMS like Pimcore, Silverstripe, or PHP-Nuke, a few hours of research and planning upfront can save you days or even weeks of headache down the road.

 

Laying Bets on Google+

The social media scene, ruled for years now by Facebook, has recently welcomed a newcomer.  Still less than a year old, Google+ has already made a big splash. It brings with it elements of Twitter and LinkedIn but seems very much to be challenging Facebook’s audience for domination, providing a casual network where friends talk, share photos and links, and otherwise stay connected.

What remains to be seen is whether or not Google+ can defeat Facebook . Do people have enough time left over in their online lives to allow both platforms to thrive?

I had been a long time avoider of the social media scene out of a preference for privacy and an attempt to keep my social circle securely in the physical world.  I’d used LinkedIn regularly for my professional networking, but that was it.  However, out of curiosity, I managed to wrangle myself an invitation to Google+ a couple weeks after it became available.

Here is what I discovered.

The biggest difference between the users of Facebook and Google+ can be illustrated by looking at the most popular personalities on each site. Whereas Facebook is ruled by the likes of Lady Gaga and Katy Perry, Google+ was at least initially dominated by people like Kevin Rose (co-founder of Digg), Markus Persson (creator of Minecraft), and Felicia Day (writer/actor and geek gamer girl). Part of the reason Google+ seems to appeal more to techies and geeks than the average digital socialite is because of its initially limited release. For a good while, the only way to get in was to either luck out and get an invite from Google, or have a friend already on the inside send you an invite. Of course, this kind of “members only” approach generated a lot of buzz for Google+ early on…people want what they can’t have more than what they can. But the only ones who actually put the effort in to get in were the ones who consider themselves technophiles.

Google+ initially drew a lot of attention for its Circles, methods of organizing your contacts into groups that you could then target your posts to, ensuring that only close friends get to see those wild party pictures and humorous non-sequitur posts while family might have exclusive rights on updates about the kids or other personal issues.  It didn’t take long for Facebook to adopt a similar method of grouping, which at the very least indicates that Facebook considers Google+ to be a serious contender.

On the other side of this coin, Google+ has also altered its platform in several ways to mimic Facebook.  For example, Google+ seemed only lukewarm about the idea of accommodating pages for companies or organizations in its early months, suggesting that it might be considered in the future.  Then suddenly, it was there.

In a competition with Google+,  Facebook is clearly going to have the advantage of its established user base.  But Google+ has recently found an advantage of its own: its search engine. One proposed strategy for exploiting it would put Google+ profiles high up next to standard Google search results wherever applicable.  In other words, there is nothing stopping Google from giving its social network first dibs on screen real estate.  This approach seems to already be effective; the same day that this strategy was suggested, Lady Gaga suddenly registered a Google+ account.

Regardless of which network wins out, or even if both find a way to coexist, the real winners are the users who have seen considerable innovation not just from Google, but also from Facebook in response to Google’s entry into the social networking field.  With Google+ in the mix, Facebook has a real reason to improve its platform in a timely fashion.  Both platforms should only get better and more inventive moving forward.