Browserless Web

The Facebook Hype…Really?

I haven’t updated this disheveled blog for a long time, but I figured this was a good a time as any to weigh in on this Facebook nonsense. I was inspired and encouraged by Josh Cantone’s story at one of my favorite tech blogs, Read/Write Web, entitled Is Facebook Worth the Hype?. I’m kind of upset because he stole my thunder on this one…I’ve been telling people that I’m bearish on Facebook for months but he beat me to the interwebs with his blog post. Not that any one reads this blog or anything, but it would have been good to have something online before people start to realize that the Facebook Emporer is, indeed, nude.

So I want names on this blog, posted here for the sake of posterity. I want quotes and names like these (quoted from R/W Web):

No…really? I mean, really Paul Allen? Really Om? I’ll get to the comparisons between Facebook and Microsoft in a bit, but Alexander the Great? You’re really going to compare one of the greatest conquerors in history to this guy? You need to watch out brother, because the Hyperbole Police are on patrol and they’ve got orders to stop offenders with extreme prejudice.

So I appeal to the three or maybe four readers this blog has…if you find any more quotes like this, please post them in the comments here or email them to me. I want the names of these people preserved for history’s sake, so that when all the hype goes away and the things I’m about to type come to pass we’ll all know who needs to have their blogger pass revoked. I know some friends of mine who have made statements grandizing facebook’s little API to the point of making the above comparisons look sensible, but I’ll keep their name(s) private for now (but don’t worry…I ain’t forget).

So let’s talk about Facebook, shall we? Specifically this little Facebook Platform that the bloggosphere is going crazy about. People are saying it’s an online OS, “it’ll change everything”. Well, I want to be very clear about this next point so I’m breaking out the hypertext markup: BULLSHIT. For Facebook, we’re talking a neglible gain. For the internet community as a whole? Even less than that. Here’s why.

There are only four positive outcomes facebook can get from it’s so called Platform, and three of them don’t count:

1. Facebook generates more traffic and therefore more ad revenue - This seems very unlikely. It’s not likely because of the nature of the apps being created. I know that developers can use this wonderful Platform to create “anything” and integrate a ton of apps, etc, etc. But the fact of the matter is that nothing truly compelling is going to be created for Facebook. Yes, I think the people who already use facebook everyday will find a lot of value out of things like iLike, the Honesty Box or the ever popular “Graffiti” but can you honestly tell me that these things are going to cause a huge spike in facebook traffic? Are people going that bananas over the “Where Have I Been Map” that Facebook is purchasing more server space? Maybe I missed something, but I don’t think that any of these apps are going to get the people who are checking facebook 5 times a day to go up to 10 times a day. So I think it’s safe to say that Facebook won’t be experiencing a huge jump in traffic as a direct result of these apps any time soon (notice that I said as a result of the apps, not the hype surrounding the apps).

2. Facebook gains a lot of new users - I don’t think this is likely for the same reasons as above. Maybe Paul Allen or my anonymous friend wants to step up here and tell me that someone like my mom, or a 40 year old factory worker is going to change their ways and start using a social networking site like facebook because they are really, really digging on the music recommendations from iLike. Or maybe they’ll convince me that someone who went through years of college without using facebook (if that’s even possible these days) will suddenly decide to get involved not because all of their friends are, but because they heard about the Honesty Box and just couldn’t stay away. Let’s be serious here. No one is joining Facebook because of any of these apps. I’m sure they are very popular within the facebook community, but they probably aren’t going to convince someone who has already decided to face Life Without Facebook to change their mind and jump on board. And I’m not really sure what kind of app would do that for someone. The fact of the matter is some people use social networking sites and some people don’t. And of those people, 80% of them have made up their mind as to which social networking site they want to use. I think it’s also safe to assume that none of the current top facebook apps are going to be enough to change anyone’s mind about these decisions. Which brings me to my next point…

3. Facebook steals a lot of users from it’s competition (read: MySpace) - See, the way I’ve been seeing it this Platform is just a late attempt by Facebook to cash in on the concept of embeddable widgets that MySpace has been absolutely killing them on for the past few years. MySpace widgets are more restrictive than Facebook’s Platform (you can only use flash and have to play within the limitations of embedded code) but there are several companies who have turned MySpace widgets into a nine figure buyout (namely Photobucket and Slide, among others). Facebook completely and totally sideswiped MySpace in terms of hype and marketing (and my buddy “Tom” should be real mad as his marketing dept for allowing them to get blown out like this), but I think that there will be only a small benefit in terms of actual users. Not to reiterate what I said above, but none of the current top Facebook apps are enough to convince any dedicated MySpace users to suddenly switch teams. If all my friends have profiles on MySpace and not Facebook, it’s going to take a very compelling app to get me to switch. More than iLike recommendations or an embeddable 30Boxes calendar. You’d think that people would understand this by now, but as a developer I can confidently say: Technology features are of limited importance in determining the success or failure of a social app. Unless you’re REALLY changing the game, unless you’re really bringing something new and innovative to the table, the tech features will always be secondary. Social sites are about the people. So if Facebook won’t get more traffic, more users or steal users from their compeition, what can they expect…?

4. Facebook gains a small boost in traffic from having a clever new feature on their website - This is the most likely outcome. I have to say, both iLike and the Honesty Box are really cool. I think they are great additions to a social site. And I think that allowing users to come up with these things was a great call. But the fact of the matter is, the people that are on Facebook everyday are going to be the ones getting the benefits of them. Everyone else will continue to ignore them and go on with their Facebookless lives. Cool features will help any social website to gain and keep users, but when you get to the level of Facebook and MySpace there are a lot larger issues in play. It’s about branding, marketing and global scalability. The cute features just have less and less of a real impact to the bottom line as the number of users grows and grows.

Now everyone is thinking it, but as usual I’ll be the one to say it: Facebook is for college kids, MySpace is for everyone else. And I know the facebook fanboys who’ll never see this post because no one reads this blog are waiting to jump on me with their little stats, <sarcastic mocking voice>”But the biggest growth demographic was 22-30 yr old professionals…”</sarcastic mocking voice>. Look, save it for someone who watches Fox News. Numbers can do funny things and we all know it. We all also know that if I go downtown right now with a microphone and start asking kids “If you’re in college, should you join Facebook or MySpace?” the answers will be as overwhelmingly one sided as a fist fight between Dick Cheney and Dan Quayle. The reality of the situation is, Facebook won’t experience any real market growth until it can deal with this issue. No amount of gadgets or cute little user created apps are going to solve the problem of national perception.

Honestly, I think Facebook has a bigger problem to deal with. I know people have been saying this about social networking for years, but there’s just no intellectual property or any kind of protectable advantage. You have to imagine that every fall Zuckerberg sweats it out for a few days thinking “I wonder what site all the kids are going to use this year?”. So far if you’re a college freshmen, you absolutely have to use Facebook. There’s no way around it. But there’s no reason for it…it’s not like none of the other social sites will work from a .edu ip address or there’s some kind of NCAA rule that students can use one and only one social website. It’s a fad, a trend, just like anything else. And I know people have been saying that about a LOT of websites (ebay and amazon among them) but with Facebook it’s amplified because by it’s nature Facebook is a social and “popular” thing. It’s where all the frat boys and hot girls do their socializing…it’s “cool” by definition. Well I can remember a time when all the incoming college freshmen had Members Only jackets and high top fades…but those days went the way of the Dodo and Facebook is one fickle breeze away from the same fate. Speaking of college, let me take y’all back to the SATs… High School:College::Xanga:Facebook. To translate, “Xanga is for high school kids what Facebook is for college kids”. Maybe the young kids using something other than Xanga these days, I’m not even sure (but YPulse is the place I’d go if I wanted to find out). The point is, one fall all the incoming freshmen are going to decide to keep their Xanga instead of switching to Facebook. I’m not sure if the “Where I’ve Been Map” or “To-Do” is going to be enough to make them change their minds.

And Please don’t try to tell me that someone is going to create a “Killer App” using the Facebook Platform that will solve all the problems I mentioned above and make Facebook a must use website. Let’s be real here. If anyone creates a killer app, something so useful and intuitive that it really does change everything…it ain’t gonna be exclusive to Facebook. It’s going to be it’s own website/product with a facebook app Also. Next time I put out an app, I’m so browserless with it that I’m gonna have a facebook app, myspace widget, netvibes module, google gadget, konfabulator widget, firefox plugin, etc, etc… There’s just no conceivable product that could be created using the Facebook Platform and usable only on Facebook that’s going to really change things for the majority of people. Some cool little features, sure. But no Fecebook exclusive Killer Apps. Which isn’t to say that allowing people to integrate all of the other web applications they use into Facebook (provided the other companies have taken the time to develop a Facebook app) that Facebook won’t make a big push for being a “start page” with added utility. This could be huge for Facebook, but again not exactly ground breaking.

I think Facebook is great, but the hype is weighing so heavy. This isn’t the next Microsoft, this isn’t an internet revolution. This most definately does NOT change everything. Smart move? Definately. Big step forward for web 2.0 and user generated content? Big yes. Big push for the “browserless web” that this blog is supposed to stand for? That too. I think it’s a good move, but it needs to be taken in perspective. I wish Zuckerbeg and all his fanboys the best of luck.

P.S. 1 - Why Facebook != Microsoft

I just want to clear this up. Back when Microsoft presented an open API to developers and encouraged them to create software, there wasn’t a lot you could really do with a computer. Times were very different. It was an issue of “You mean I can do my taxes using my personal computer?” or “Wow, you mean I can edit photos and layouts using my home computer?” back then. People were able to do things that they otherwise could not use their computer to do as a result of the first popular M$ apps. Doors were being broken down, the role of the PC was expanding. What is Facebook giving us? Well, I don’t even need to go into listing the apps again. You can browse here and feel free to leave a comment or send an email if you can find one, just one app that has the potential to have an impact similar to what Quicken had in the 80s. While both Facebook and Microsoft were the first in their fields to present an open API, the truth is that only one of them did it in a way that was actually relevant and groundbreaking.

P.S. 2 - Developer’s Perspective

From a developers perspective, this Platform is nothing special. I logged in and checked it out. Essentially you get to write your own code, connect to your own database and you have the ability to make datacalls using Facebook’s little proprietary system. This is so unspecial it’s amazing. It’s like Facebook saying “Write yourself a PHP app and load it into our system. We’ll even let you request user data that no one has found a way to use yet. Isn’t our Platform grand?” A lot of the applications for the “Platform” are just web apps inside of a iframe. All Facebook is doing is organzing the “apps” and giving people a quick way to add them to a page. I was really hoping for something more…an actual “Platform” that provided aggregated functionality or something. I guess this opens things up by making it so that any 14 year old with a book on PHP can make a Facebook app…but what’s the point? It’s just basically giving anyone a shot at being noticed by all the facebook fanboys when someone learns how to game the system and fradulently put themselves in the day’s “Top Downloads” (the same way people do with Firefox and Konfabulator fanboys today). The whole thing is just too plain to warrant all the hype and claims of “innovation”.

Third Voice

Today’s Tech Crunch posts made me think about a startup concept that’s been kicking around the net for awhile now. Through a VC friend of mine I heard about a sad tale about a company called Third Voice. This company’s software did something similar to what recent releases OthersOnline and Diigo are doing. The basic concept was to provide a message board and chat service that allowed people to leave comments about a given URL. I thought it was a pretty good idea. The Third Voice would provide a way for people to get reviews of products or services, discuss recent news and find out about crooked websites or poor service.

A buddy of mine and I heard about the concept (and it’s demise) and decided to take a whack at it. I was setting up the technical side of things when I started to look closely at the business model so I could develop the software requirements. I noticed more than a few problems with the concept when I was putting it through it’s paces designing the spec…

When I was doing research and looking around, I noticed that most site that the product would be useful on already had discussion, either in comments or a messageboard/forum. People usually discuss things like news, new products, music, etc. Well all of these things already have comment boxes. I love the idea of putting up a way for people to talk about a web 2.0 product or story…but that’s what techcrunch is for right? Amazon for books, various music sites for music… It just didn’t seem like there was a need that wasn’t being filled.

We thought about the use for doing reviews of a site or it’s product/service. But then we’d have to have a way to moderate it somehow to prevent people from slandering their business rivals or to give a business owner a chance to defend himself (granted most “forums” don’t do this, but it only seems fair if the product would be used mainly for reviews and hints). And then when looking at the list of sites I browse on a regular basis…not many need “reviews”. It just didn’t seem to be that useful…

I also took into consideration the resistance from website owners. In the wired article about the demise of Third Voice people referred to it as “digital graffiti”. And I would assume that a web site owner would prefer to have someone on his comment board, giving him more page views and community loyalty than to have some 3rd party app making a living off of his content. The more I thought about that, the less I liked it.

The final problem I saw was adoption. Installing an IE or firefox plugin is pretty easy. But really, how many people have the knowledge or inclination to do it? The thing about a forum is it takes a large volume of contributing users. You have to include everyone, even the people who render themselves technically incompetent. I tried all kinds of ideas…downloaded app, browser plugin, bookmarklet… just none of it seemed easy enough to set up to where you could get a large enough volume of people.

It’s possible that I over thought these issues or was a bit risk adverse. There are times when I wish we had just done it and thrown it out there (and I guess it’s not too late). I will be very interested to see how OthersOnline and Diigo do. I considered a social networking system like OthersOnline, but my problem is that surfing habits aren’t all that indicative of personality or traits. Look in your browser History right now and look at the last 20 sites you went to. Are these the things you want to be associated with? (if you’re reading this in the evening and you’ve got porn in your history, you know what I’m talking about). I think Diigo could be very valuable, but it has some of the “digital graffiti” aspect to it. The annotation feature was something I’d considered previously and I think it’s a great, great idea. I think this product could really go far, if they can get people to adopt it.

Even with all of it’s problems, I think the Third Voice concept has a lot of merit. In a more offline context, the idea of being able to leave little warnings or notes or interesting comments at various places in the real world is very intriguing and would be good to model online. For example wouldn’t it be great if you could access (useful) notes / tips / trivia / warnings when you were in a strange city (”Warning: Do not flirt with the redheaded bartender, she’s prone to violence”). That same concept would be wonderful on the web. I’m glad that there a few people playing on the edge of this space so I can see how it works out. And RIP to Third Voice.

IPT Spring Show

I haven’t updated this disheveled blog for a long time, but I figured this was a good a time as any to weigh in on this Facebook nonsense. I was inspired and encouraged by Josh Cantone’s story at one of my favorite tech blogs, Read/Write Web, entitled Is Facebook Worth the Hype?. I’m kind of upset because he stole my thunder on this one…I’ve been telling people that I’m bearish on Facebook for months but he beat me to the interwebs with his blog post. Not that any one reads this blog or anything, but it would have been good to have something online before people start to realize that the Facebook Emporer is, indeed, nude.

So I want names on this blog, posted here for the sake of posterity. I want quotes and names like these (quoted from R/W Web):

No…really? I mean, really Paul Allen? Really Om? I’ll get to the comparisons between Facebook and Microsoft in a bit, but Alexander the Great? You’re really going to compare one of the greatest conquerors in history to this guy? You need to watch out brother, because the Hyperbole Police are on patrol and they’ve got orders to stop offenders with extreme prejudice.

So I appeal to the three or maybe four readers this blog has…if you find any more quotes like this, please post them in the comments here or email them to me. I want the names of these people preserved for history’s sake, so that when all the hype goes away and the things I’m about to type come to pass we’ll all know who needs to have their blogger pass revoked. I know some friends of mine who have made statements grandizing facebook’s little API to the point of making the above comparisons look sensible, but I’ll keep their name(s) private for now (but don’t worry…I ain’t forget).

So let’s talk about Facebook, shall we? Specifically this little Facebook Platform that the bloggosphere is going crazy about. People are saying it’s an online OS, “it’ll change everything”. Well, I want to be very clear about this next point so I’m breaking out the hypertext markup: BULLSHIT. For Facebook, we’re talking a neglible gain. For the internet community as a whole? Even less than that. Here’s why.

There are only four positive outcomes facebook can get from it’s so called Platform, and three of them don’t count:

1. Facebook generates more traffic and therefore more ad revenue - This seems very unlikely. It’s not likely because of the nature of the apps being created. I know that developers can use this wonderful Platform to create “anything” and integrate a ton of apps, etc, etc. But the fact of the matter is that nothing truly compelling is going to be created for Facebook. Yes, I think the people who already use facebook everyday will find a lot of value out of things like iLike, the Honesty Box or the ever popular “Graffiti” but can you honestly tell me that these things are going to cause a huge spike in facebook traffic? Are people going that bananas over the “Where Have I Been Map” that Facebook is purchasing more server space? Maybe I missed something, but I don’t think that any of these apps are going to get the people who are checking facebook 5 times a day to go up to 10 times a day. So I think it’s safe to say that Facebook won’t be experiencing a huge jump in traffic as a direct result of these apps any time soon (notice that I said as a result of the apps, not the hype surrounding the apps).

2. Facebook gains a lot of new users - I don’t think this is likely for the same reasons as above. Maybe Paul Allen or my anonymous friend wants to step up here and tell me that someone like my mom, or a 40 year old factory worker is going to change their ways and start using a social networking site like facebook because they are really, really digging on the music recommendations from iLike. Or maybe they’ll convince me that someone who went through years of college without using facebook (if that’s even possible these days) will suddenly decide to get involved not because all of their friends are, but because they heard about the Honesty Box and just couldn’t stay away. Let’s be serious here. No one is joining Facebook because of any of these apps. I’m sure they are very popular within the facebook community, but they probably aren’t going to convince someone who has already decided to face Life Without Facebook to change their mind and jump on board. And I’m not really sure what kind of app would do that for someone. The fact of the matter is some people use social networking sites and some people don’t. And of those people, 80% of them have made up their mind as to which social networking site they want to use. I think it’s also safe to assume that none of the current top facebook apps are going to be enough to change anyone’s mind about these decisions. Which brings me to my next point…

3. Facebook steals a lot of users from it’s competition (read: MySpace) - See, the way I’ve been seeing it this Platform is just a late attempt by Facebook to cash in on the concept of embeddable widgets that MySpace has been absolutely killing them on for the past few years. MySpace widgets are more restrictive than Facebook’s Platform (you can only use flash and have to play within the limitations of embedded code) but there are several companies who have turned MySpace widgets into a nine figure buyout (namely Photobucket and Slide, among others). Facebook completely and totally sideswiped MySpace in terms of hype and marketing (and my buddy “Tom” should be real mad as his marketing dept for allowing them to get blown out like this), but I think that there will be only a small benefit in terms of actual users. Not to reiterate what I said above, but none of the current top Facebook apps are enough to convince any dedicated MySpace users to suddenly switch teams. If all my friends have profiles on MySpace and not Facebook, it’s going to take a very compelling app to get me to switch. More than iLike recommendations or an embeddable 30Boxes calendar. You’d think that people would understand this by now, but as a developer I can confidently say: Technology features are of limited importance in determining the success or failure of a social app. Unless you’re REALLY changing the game, unless you’re really bringing something new and innovative to the table, the tech features will always be secondary. Social sites are about the people. So if Facebook won’t get more traffic, more users or steal users from their compeition, what can they expect…?

4. Facebook gains a small boost in traffic from having a clever new feature on their website - This is the most likely outcome. I have to say, both iLike and the Honesty Box are really cool. I think they are great additions to a social site. And I think that allowing users to come up with these things was a great call. But the fact of the matter is, the people that are on Facebook everyday are going to be the ones getting the benefits of them. Everyone else will continue to ignore them and go on with their Facebookless lives. Cool features will help any social website to gain and keep users, but when you get to the level of Facebook and MySpace there are a lot larger issues in play. It’s about branding, marketing and global scalability. The cute features just have less and less of a real impact to the bottom line as the number of users grows and grows.

Now everyone is thinking it, but as usual I’ll be the one to say it: Facebook is for college kids, MySpace is for everyone else. And I know the facebook fanboys who’ll never see this post because no one reads this blog are waiting to jump on me with their little stats, <sarcastic mocking voice>”But the biggest growth demographic was 22-30 yr old professionals…”</sarcastic mocking voice>. Look, save it for someone who watches Fox News. Numbers can do funny things and we all know it. We all also know that if I go downtown right now with a microphone and start asking kids “If you’re in college, should you join Facebook or MySpace?” the answers will be as overwhelmingly one sided as a fist fight between Dick Cheney and Dan Quayle. The reality of the situation is, Facebook won’t experience any real market growth until it can deal with this issue. No amount of gadgets or cute little user created apps are going to solve the problem of national perception.

Honestly, I think Facebook has a bigger problem to deal with. I know people have been saying this about social networking for years, but there’s just no intellectual property or any kind of protectable advantage. You have to imagine that every fall Zuckerberg sweats it out for a few days thinking “I wonder what site all the kids are going to use this year?”. So far if you’re a college freshmen, you absolutely have to use Facebook. There’s no way around it. But there’s no reason for it…it’s not like none of the other social sites will work from a .edu ip address or there’s some kind of NCAA rule that students can use one and only one social website. It’s a fad, a trend, just like anything else. And I know people have been saying that about a LOT of websites (ebay and amazon among them) but with Facebook it’s amplified because by it’s nature Facebook is a social and “popular” thing. It’s where all the frat boys and hot girls do their socializing…it’s “cool” by definition. Well I can remember a time when all the incoming college freshmen had Members Only jackets and high top fades…but those days went the way of the Dodo and Facebook is one fickle breeze away from the same fate. Speaking of college, let me take y’all back to the SATs… High School:College::Xanga:Facebook. To translate, “Xanga is for high school kids what Facebook is for college kids”. Maybe the young kids using something other than Xanga these days, I’m not even sure (but YPulse is the place I’d go if I wanted to find out). The point is, one fall all the incoming freshmen are going to decide to keep their Xanga instead of switching to Facebook. I’m not sure if the “Where I’ve Been Map” or “To-Do” is going to be enough to make them change their minds.

I think Facebook is great, but the hype is weighing so heavy. This isn’t the next Microsoft, this isn’t an internet revolution. This most definately does NOT change everything. Smart move? Definately. Big step forward for web 2.0 and user generated content? Big yes. Big push for the “browserless web” that this blog is supposed to stand for? That too. I think it’s a good move, but it needs to be taken in perspective. I wish Zuckerbeg and all his fanboys the best of luck.

P.S. 1 - Why Facebook != Microsoft

I just want to clear this up. Back when Microsoft presented an open API to developers and encouraged them to create software, there wasn’t a lot you could really do with a computer. Times were very different. It was an issue of “You mean I can do my taxes using my personal computer?” or “Wow, you mean I can edit photos and layouts using my home computer?” back then. People were able to do things that they otherwise could not use their computer to do as a result of the first popular M$ apps. Doors were being broken down, the role of the PC was expanding. What is Facebook giving us? Well, I don’t even need to go into listing the apps again. You can browse here and feel free to leave a comment or send an email if you can find one, just one app that has the potential to have an impact similar to what Quicken had in the 80s. While both Facebook and Microsoft were the first in their fields to present an open API, the truth is that only one of them did it in a way that was actually relevant and groundbreaking.

P.S. 2 - Developer’s Perspective

From a developers perspective, this Platform is nothing special. I logged in and checked it out. Essentially you get to write your own code, connect to your own database and you have the ability to make datacalls using Facebook’s little proprietary system. This is so unspecial it’s amazing. It’s like Facebook saying “Write yourself a PHP app and load it into our system. We’ll even let you request user data that no one has found a way to use yet. Isn’t our Platform grand?” A lot of the applications for the “Platform” are just web apps inside of a iframe. All Facebook is doing is organzing the “apps” and giving people a quick way to add them to a page. I was really hoping for something more…an actual “Platform” that provided aggregated functionality or something. I guess this opens things up by making it so that any 14 year old with a book on PHP can make a Facebook app…but what’s the point? It’s just basically giving anyone a shot at being noticed by all the facebook fanboys when someone learns how to game the system and fradulently put themselves in the day’s “Top Downloads” (the same way people do with Firefox and Konfabulator fanboys today). The whole thing is just too plain to warrant all the hype and claims of “innovation”.

The Wonders of Widgets

Now the topic of widgets. There has been some “recent” news about them and I thought I would look into how widgets relate to the “browserless web” concept. A “widget” (or “gadget” depending on your preferred flavor) is a small application that uses a basic framework and commonly gets content from an external source. Popular examples of widgets are weather reporting, sticky notes, date and time applicatins and of course games. The most innovative widgets tend to gather data from external sources to aggregate and display it on the desktop. Widgets give users the ability to view this content in a form of their choosing without having to use a browser. Widgets are a key technology in the browserless web concept. But how are they doing, and what kind of adoption do they have? In order to look more into the concepts behind widgets I’m going to try and answer (or at least discuss) four questions:

1. What good are they?
2. Who is making them?
3. Who is using them (and how)?
4. How will they make money?

What good are they?

I’ve seen four major uses for widgets. They come in many categories and flavors of course, but there are four main purposes for them that I’ve seen:

Continue reading The Wonders of Widgets…

Microcontent Design

Richard McManus at Read/Write Web is starting a series on “microcontent design” that is right on track with the theme of this blog.

“Who needs to bookmark and surf a bunch of Web sites anymore, when you can search or monitor several RSS ‘feeds’ much more efficiently?”

Browserless anyone?

This is a new term for the concept that this blog is dedicated to. I think there are two ways to look at the implications of microcontent design. One is from the end user perspective. To the end user, microcontent design provides a lot in terms of flexibility and personalization (and if you think either of those things aren’t important to a consumer, ask anyone who uses a cell phone for more than just phone calls).

Richard mentions the fact that Google and Microsoft are really starting to throw their combined 800 lbs of gorilla behind the concept of Atom and Structured Blogging. A lot of people believe that this means that Microsoft is trying to win a “standards war” centered around RSS. This is definately incorrect. “Structured Blogging” is a concept that is as tied to a single corporation as the idea of the RSS standard (in fact it was pioneered by many of the same people, including Bob Wyman who I worked with briefly at PubSub). Anyhow, the point is that large companies are beginning to push the microcontent formats and seeking ways to monetize it.

The main focus of this article is Structured Blogging and it’s implications, which could be large. My primary problem with structured blogging is that it’s a very powerful concept that doesn’t provide a lot of immediate value to individual bloggers. It’s what in VC terms is a “vitamin product” (as opposed to a “painkiller”) in that while it’s very beneficial, it doesn’t solve an immediate need. PubSub itself falls into this kind of category and it hasn’t been doing so great (though there are rumors of aquisition). I don’t know that people will be quick to adopt it, but boy wouldn’t it be great if they did?

The other side of microcontent design is from the developer perspective. XML based APIs provide a huge opportunity to distribute an application to many formats and websites. To properly deliver said microcontent developers will need to structure their application in a way that the majority of “business logic” is done in a central XML based API. This way everyone will have the same accessiblity to the content and be given control over how to display it. I’m writing a paper for the upcoming PHP Conference in NYC that will go into far more depth about API Based Web Design. This plays right into the concept of microcontent design, and will be a key to the adoption of the concept. First users have to see the value, then developers have to develop in a way that makes it possible. I’m really looking forward to Richard’s next post.

What Is Google Up To?

And of course my first post will have less to do with a browserless web and more to do with putting everything possible into the browser. But the quesiton has to be asked: Is anyone else afraid of google, or is it just me?

There used to be a time when every geek loved google. I would hope that one day I would start a company that would actually be successful and maybe we would get acquired and I would get a nice polo with the google logo on it (or whatever they have). It was supposed to be this “do no evil” geek version of disney land where every uses a powerbook and comes to work on a segway. Geeks are the kings! Business guys don’t run things! And they just kept bringing it with app after app. Their stock price soared, they single handedly brushed aside the stigma of “dotcom = bust”. They were a tech darling.

So what happened? I don’t know if I can put my finger on it, but I have this general sense of unease about google’s intentions. This sentiment is mirrored by several other developers that I know. First off, they’re just too big too fast. They got a lot of money and power in a short time and that’s never good for anybody. They move in extreme secrecy. At least with M$, they have to be somewhat open about their business goals and practices due to demands from Wall St and their B2B clients. Google has no such obligations (or at least they don’t recognize them). They do whatever they want and you don’t know until they’re ready (or as I sometimes think of it “until it’s too late”). And they’ve had some misses recently. Orkut kind of flopped (maybe the social engineering wasn’t covered in the MIT phd programs). Google base is…decent at best. They all can’t be winners but google is in the spotlight with a high standard. Everytime they release a so-so product, I have to think “Maybe it wasn’t magic afterall…maybe they just got lucky” (gasp!).

So what are they up to now?

Continue reading What Is Google Up To?…

Welcome To the Browserless Web

My name is Joel Hoard and I started this blog because I’m interested in data integration technology and the concept of a “browserless” web. I know, you’re thinking “But Joel…I’m using a browser to view your blog right now”. When I say “browserless”, I really mean the traditional web experience…open a browser and go to a url to find content. Ideally, the data should be independent of the presentation (pardon my geekspeak). I should be able to view and update data in any number of ways, depending on what suits me at the moment. Today everyone is focus on “websites”. I’m looking forward to the day when people develop “applications” where the broswer is only one of many interfaces to the data. I guess one day I kind of had an ephiphany: “Waitaminute…it’s all just data!”. And after that I wanted to be able to access webapps, blogs, instant messengers, emails…everything whenever from wherever.

I think a lot of people share this view and the trends are very slowly moving in that direction. RSS feeds are obviously my #1 indicator. The concept behind RSS is the key concept of the “browserless” web…people publish data and other people can subscribe to it using the interface of their choice (usually the web, sometimes a desktop app). I don’t need to go to a bunch of different websites or maintain bookmarks or any of that…the content comes to me and I read it how and when I please. Now that’s browsing!

I know a lot of you are thinking…”Joel…why did you start a blog about ‘browerless web’, whatever that is”. Well, the answer is I’m a geek. And real geeks do geek things. And I spend a lot of time tracking these kinds of news stories anyway, so I figured why not make it official. Hope someone else enjoys it too.