The noise level on the “What is Web 2.0” discussion has, at least in my mind, officially passed the threshold into the purely academic and potentially ridiculous.
Here are some of my favorite quotes:
There are more (many more) but I’ll spare you. Today, Web 2.0 is a fun little label that the “technology thinkers” are enjoying these days. For me, all this discussion about what it really means leaves me with one true meaning: it means nothing. More importantly, it means nothing to anyone else.
None of these trends and technologies mean much of anything until they’re introduced to the world in a tangible and useful context. Good technology does not advertise itself. It simply makes things better without getting in the way. As technophiles, we tend to lose sight of this. The most popular tags on del.icio.us (a “Web 2.0” destination) are about technology. It’s great to see the tech community becoming richer, but let’s face reality – the old couple next door could care less about your Web 2.0.
Of course, once the technologists are done with “Web 2.0” and created enough buzz, the marketers, public relations people and their minions will take it and run – using it and abusing it to create a message that has little to do with whatever Web 2.0 was supposed to mean to begin with.
So let’s stop wasting our time on theory and philosophy and start thinking about how this stuff is going to change the world - the rest of the world that is.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 28, 2005, 09:29AM
I haven’t shown CSS any love in a very long time. Sitepoint’s Trenton Moss lays out his top ten CSS tricks. WG has a nice post on Maintainable CSS.
A Cognitive Analysis of Tagging is an interesting read on cognitive load and tagging by Rashmi Sinha.
JS Eclipse is a new freeware plugin for Eclipse.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 27, 2005, 09:45AMAs RSS becomes more and more popular, we’re starting to see all kinds of tools to do all kinds of things to help you manage, publish and promote RSS feeds. Here’s a summary:
I’m sure there are other tools out there. If I’m missing any, feel free to add in the comments.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 25, 2005, 10:45AMThe Wall Street Journal has an insightful article on how Microsoft is changing the way it builds software.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 24, 2005, 04:47PM
I just stumbled on this and don’t know how long this has been the case. It looks like Google Video is using Flash to deliver video (exclusively, from what I can gather).
This makes a lot of sense because Flash can deliver high quality video without any sort of media player download. When Google Video first debuted, Google chose some weird, open source platform that required a download.
As a lot of content providers are realizing Flash is probably the best way to deliver on-demand video over the web today. It’s nearly 100% install base, quick buffering and streamlined player results in a much simpler, more seamless experience.
As much as Google would hate to admit it, Flash is a great way to deliver rich content and applications to a multitude of platforms and devices. Google and Microsoft may be headed on a collision course, but the other viable “platform” out there is Adobe’s Flash.
WebsiteIcons.com hosts a collection of free, monochramatic icons. Not bad.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 23, 2005, 10:56AM
Google’s Firefox Toolbar has come out of beta with some new features.
News.com has a solid article on the nightmare scenario that Microsoft may be facing as Google evolves from search engine to Internet application platform.
They cite Google's investments in fiber cables and Wifi as well as Microsoft's reorganization that brings together their Platforms division and MSN. The article rightly points out that Microsoft has seen this threat before. Netscape promised a "web platform" revolution way back when and Microsoft handily suppressed that revolt. This time around, the revolutionaries are much better funded and arguably more savvy than last.
This scenario has been expounded upon before and while I think there is merit to it, I think it's far easier said than done (sort of like...Communism).
In order for Google to make this happen, they need intimiate control of the landing pad - the user's desktop screen. To date, all of this AJAX-laden, Web 2.0 goodness is happening on a Microsoft screen near you (excluding the 5% or so on Macs and other platforms).
Google Talk. Google Desktop/Sidebar. Google Earth. Just about everything Google has put out that lives outside of your browser is running on Microsoft's operating systems. Google is anxious to begin the march out of your browser's four walls. Ultimately, the key question that arises is: if Microsoft & Google are about to go toe-to-toe, and Microsoft owns the platform (today), and Google is intent on breaking out of the browser and into your desktop/devices/etc., where will their applications land?
Put another way, can Google crush Microsoft in a battle that is effectively fought on Microsoft's own platform? If history has any say, the answer is no. Microsoft is building out a whole new arena as we speak, and their intimiate understanding of that arena will not be shared with its competitors (just as it wasn't shared with Netscape years ago).
Beyond relegating Google to another software vendor that plays on Microsoft's turf, Microsoft has its own plans for leveraging services-based software on their OS. Technologies like XAML, effectively HTML for the desktop, highlight a clear plan to speak to your hardware - graphics, sound, input devices - in a far more intimiate way through pure XML. Rich user interfaces will be delivered as needed to the desktop, or your side bar, or your Start menu, or really anywhere. And they won't just be Ajax. They will tap directly into the hardware capabilities that Vista will be enable right out of the box.
If its agreed that Google can't win this battle inside of Microsoft's own arena, then the only remaining option is to go outside - and that's where things get really interesting. Is Google planning on delivering a thin Internet appliance that does just about nothing except run Google applications? Is it based on Linux? Is custom hardware involved? If so, who are they partnering with? Does Google really want to tie software to hardware (a la Apple)?
In the end, no matter how many fiber lines and Wifi networks Google gets its hands on, the real beach head is the last three feet that lands them in the user's living room or office. Today, Microsoft owns that experience and it is far easier said than done to unseat them from that role.
All of this doesn't even address how Google plans to make money. Just about everything they offer today is free. I seriously doubt that users are going to tolerate advertisements on their word processors or spreadsheets. If that's the case, then at some point, Google's going to have to break the bad news to a lot of people: start paying for our services. Microsoft broke the bad news long ago. They sell software. Do users really want to subscribe to a "Word Processing Service?"
In the end, I think these theories are appealing because various facts seem to fit so snugly in relation to one another. Reality and the devilish details within may tell a very different story. If the theories are correct, Google is about to go to war, and it may prove to be it's Vietnam.
And let's not forget...Yahoo!
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 22, 2005, 04:46PM
Proggy Fonts : free, neat bitmap fonts for programming (or whatever).
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 21, 2005, 08:42AM
Top 10 Ajax Applications (Part 2)
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 19, 2005, 02:55PM
Betanews has an article about Microsoft’s “Windows Presentation Foundation Everywhere," or WPF/E initiative. It’s essentially XAML for other platforms besides Windows Vista. At the PDC conference, Microsoft showed examples of WPF/E on a PDA and smart phone. Support for Mac is planned as well.
This is an important shift for Microsoft. Rather than force everyone to their platform, they’re opening things up a bit. Of course, the native Avalon stuff will have a richer API.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 17, 2005, 12:15PM
Microsoft is going head-on into RSS support with it’s future product road map. Scoble lists out the initiatives. This makes a lot of sense in a lot of places - especially at the operating system level. If you’re a smaller RSS play (or even slightly bigger – like Newsgator), you’ve got to be a bit worried (or excited?).
Internet Explorer Developer Toolbar Beta. Very useful. Also, don’t miss the excellent Web Developer Firefox Extension.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 15, 2005, 01:11PM
Yahoo! has released Instant Search. It’s a neat as-you-type popup that is wired to Yahoo!’s shortcuts.
Recently, there’s been a whole lot of speculation about what Google’s master plan is. It’s sort of fun to play around with conspiracy theories and the Google roadmap is a juicy one.
In my opinion, Google is sort of a fishabowl example of what happened in the late 90’s with the whole dot-com debacle. If we liken Google itself to the Internet back then, then all of Google’s mini-projects (Talk, Desktop, Earth, etc.), are really attempts at backing in to the lofty growth expectations that have been imposed upon it by both investors and the public.
You see all these free services roll out, and they’re sort of neat and impressive, yet they don’t make any money. Google’s core revenue comes from search advertising. Almost all of the “toys” they’ve put out are free (as of today). Maybe Google actually has a plan that will one day turn all of these services into money makers. The startups back then also had a plan (or so they thought they did).
I was personally involved in one of these startups way back when. It was a strange time. Enormous amounts of money and energy were thrown at ideas that simply didn’t make money. There was a “we’ll figure that part out later” mindset that permeated. I’m assumng that Google is committing an impressive amount of talent and money to build and deploy these services. I’d also assume that these various efforts have to translate into money at some point.
A lot has been made of the “GoogleOS.” The theory goes that Google is actually working towards rendering your local desktop operating system irrelevant. Your information and the applications you use to manage it will all be on the web. While it’s part of Google’s strategy to inject itself into more and more of our computing experience, I think the leap to an “Internet OS” is outlandish.
I think part of Google’s strategy to survive and thrive is to end its relegation inside your browser. It wants in on your desktop experience. I think this transition, both critical and very dangerous for Google, will prove to be Google’s most difficult evolutionary step. First off, the arena they’re forced to head towards isn’t their own. It’s Microsoft’s. And while you can do some impressive things with executable installs that people can download, you’ll always be a step behind. Imagine a sport where the home team can change the rules of the game and understands the nuances of the arena better than any visiting team ever will.
Secondly, by leaving the browser, Google as "destination" starts to disintegrate. The destination is important for two reasons: (1) branding and (2) it's a place to put ads. As services start to get interspersed throughout the desktop experience, the brand relevancy of Google will diminish. More importantly, where do you put the ads – Google’s bread and butter revenue generator? Experience shows that once you breach the desktop, the tolerance level goes way down. The desktop is personal. It’s the user’s own private space.
Which I think leads to what may prove to be the fatal blow for the “GoogleOS.” While we’re all enjoying the increasing power of the Internet, we don’t want it overtaking our lives. The browser is a clear line of demarcation. ALso, from a business or enterprise perspective, any sort of Internet OS is not only intrusive but downright dangerous (or at least perceived as such).
In the end, I don’t think there is a master plan. Just as you had start-ups for just about any idea in the late 90’s, Google’s going to roll the dice on a wide array of efforts. They’ve got the cash and the brand to do it and the expectations are so high that they pretty much have to. Either way, it’ll be interesting to watch (and play) as all this unfolds.
A new (and I might add, very slick) personal RSS/web portal: Netvibes. Where did these guys come from?
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 14, 2005, 08:51PM
Wildly off-topic, but too ridiculous to ignore: Gillette has unveiled a razor with five (yes, five) blades. It is a very odd thing when truth follows fiction (especially when the fiction is a product of The Onion).
Via one of the best link roll’s out there: Waxy.org’s links.
The IEBlog lays out some of the new features we can expect with Internet Explorer 7 Beta 2. It looks like the beta releases aren’t just bug fixes but a whole slew of new features. Thanks to Firefox for waking these guys up.
Google introduces Blog Search.
Top 10 Ajax Applications – with honorable mentions.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 13, 2005, 08:29AM
Google Maps has added an overlay of recent satellite imagery of the New Orleans area hit by Hurricane Katrina.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 12, 2005, 11:35AM
This sort of blew my mind. The Gap Stores (which include the Gap, Banana Republic and Old Navy) actually shut down to upgrade to a new AJAX-style interface. The New York Times has an article up about it.
I’m dumbfounded as to how (a) the business people would even allow that to happen, no matter the cost and (b) why they’d even have to shut down in the first place to get this done. As to (a), this is yet another classic example of hostage-taking by technology. The customers here (the Gap business itself) simply don’t have the prerequisite knowledge to question this kind of call. As to (b), the fact that the site even has to come down calls into question the architectural soundness of their whole e-commerce infrastructure. Mind you, I’m criticizing from miles away, but you can’t help but ask why.
If you visit the site through the front door, you’re turned away. However, you can actually play with the new interfaces here and here and here. Are they revolutionary? I don’t think so (despite the quotes in the Times article). I couldn’t help but notice how Flex-ish this all seems though. Anyone who doubted that AJAX isn’t a threat to Flex should compare the Gap sites to the Flex-powered TJ Maxx. In both cases, the application of next-gen technologies to improve the flow of the user experience is half-baked. TJ Maxx leans on Flex for the shopping cart experience while Gap focuses on the configuring the product and adding to cart portion. At this point, we’re still struggling with fitting this stuff into classic HTML-based e-commerce. Hopefully we’ll get to a day where we can look back and note how hoaky this all seems.
It’s been over a week since I’ve posted on basement.org. I was actually away on a brief vacation. Of course, I should have probably posted this before I left. Spilt milk I suppose.
Anyway, it’s good to be back and I’ll be rolling out some new posts on a regular basis again.
Posted by Richard Ziade on September 1, 2005, 07:29PM
Macromedia’s Mike Chambers posted a thoughtful commentary on how Flash is being perceived in the context of all this “Web 2.0” brouhaha. In sum, he talks about how in the midst of all these attempts to define Web 2.0, Flash in fact meets many of the requirements, yet is oddly missing from the story:
I think that the biggest secret on the web today is that Flash is an application platform with a virtual machine and a robust programming model and application development framework.
He goes on to hit some of the key points about why Flash isn’t in the mix: it’s history as a design (rather than development) platform; it’s lack of a programming environment that developers are comfortable with; etc.
One point he doesn’t mention is that Flash is a proprietary technology. It’s future depends on the whims of a large corporation. I personally don’t buy this argument. I think it’s more borne out of a self-anointed romanticism that the whole “Web 2.0” community fosters, rather than real limitations. PHP is a great example of a grass roots technology that gained traction over tag-based application servers simply because it’s free and open, regardless of whether it is superior or not.
The AJAX–Flash struggle is a bit different. AJAX is really just a mish-mosh of various web technologies. Regardless, it’s prime to garner that sort of community support. Personally, I think AJAX is a just a band aid to hold us over until the real next generation stuff takes hold.
Nevertheless, Flash has a challenge on it’s hands. I’ve actually blogged about this very topic before. I argued that the party was already over and that Macromedia had the answer with Flex but missed the boat by relegating exclusively to enterprise use. I urged Macromedia to open it up and let people play. Let it go toe-to-toe with this AJAX nonsense.
In a response, David Temkin, CTO of Laszlo Systems, pointed out that OpenLaszlo already existed and it was completely open source. I responded by asking why Laszlo didn’t take off then? The thread ended after that.
This entire scenario has me recalling Malcolm Gladwell’s Tipping Point. AJAX obviously “tipped” and took hold. Products like Open Laszlo (and others) didn’t. You could argue that Flash apps require a relatively new and somewhat foreign syntax and programming approach. Then again, AJAX is a nightmare to work with. Maybe it’s because AJAX belongs to no one and is a concept borne out of the community without the spectre of LargeCorp hanging over it. I’m not really sure.
In the end, I’m a huge fan of Flash as a rich experience delivery mechanism. It’s lightweight. It runs on an incredibly broad user base across platforms and it can run circles around the best of the AJAX apps (imagine a true vector mapping application in Flash).
Mike alluded to some new initiatives that may very well open the way for Flash to take hold. I’m looking forward to seeing them and I sincerely hope that Macromedia/Adobe steps back and let’s the community carry it forward. That seems to be a key part of the puzzle.
So, what’s the slickest (and constantly getting slicker) web-based feed reader/personal portal/start page thingy? In my moderately humble opinion it’s Microsoft’s mad experiment: Start.com.
I just imported my 200+ feed OPML in about two seconds and started dragging, expanding and rearranging my front page with my feeds of choice. You can add columns, increase/decrease headlines, even save searches that you want to keep around and maintain. Side by side with Google’s & Yahoo’s personalized portal pages, this bad boy destroys them.
I’ve still got my own gripes with it, and more importantly, with this woefully outdated style of displaying information (portals are soooo 1999). Regardless, you can’t help but be impressed with the speed and quality at which Start.com has evolved. Hats off to that team (all three of them).