Membership Has its Priveledges

Kelly Abbott's Stream | Namesake

Namesake.com

I’ve been a member of Namesake for a while now. I met the co-founders Brian and Dan a while back when I was working in LA. We kept contact and over the years have even had occasion to party together. So when they invited me to join their new site Namesake, I joined and much to my joy, I found myself quickly enjoying what they had built. Even now, many months later, I find myself returning every day to find out everything I need to know to make myself look smarter in front of people for whom that’s important. In my business, that’s you, dear reader.

One of the things I find myself continually doing is clicking on the links members of Namesake post every day. Namesake is my de facto news source. Given that Brian and Dan co-founded and sold Newroo to News Corp a few years back, this should hardly be a surprise to me. But it is. Namesake is not packaged like a news site. But so often I get what I need to know about the world from it. News by any other name would smell as sweet.

Today I posted my first of many link rolls from what I’m learning there. I hope you get as much from it as I do.

Posted in product development, product reviews, the internet as we see it | Leave a comment

Namesake Links for the Day

Kegbot

Kegbot logo

Kegbot

Kegbot is a free, open-source project to turn your beer kegerator into a computerized drink tracker. Kegbot is an open source project, intended to beer enthusiasts, DIY hackers, homebrewers, and anyone with an interest in monitoring their beer.

Analysis: Beer + Open Source Software = Win!

Link

TED Conversations

TED launches TED-specific conversations platform to elicit conversations around “questions, ideas and debates.”

TED Conversations

TED Conversations

Analysis: TED + Forums = Win! But only if they can keep the trolls at bay.

Link.

Steve Baker (author of Final Jeopardy) on Day 2 of IBM Jeopardy Challenge

Steve Baker Talks About The Day 2 Of the IBM Jeopardy Challenge by ahess247

Analysis: why Watson does was it does. Win!

Why the NYTimes might (not) be worth billions.

The basic thesis that the NYT should be worth a ton of money really so absurd? It’s an iconic global brand whose main competition as an iconic serious English-language global media brand is owned by the UK government. The New York Times Company currently has amarket capitalization of about $1.5 billion and if their P/E ratio were at the S&P 500 average, it would in fact be worth “billions” right now. So why isn’t it

Analysis: ARPU + Uniques – Operating Costs = Valuation

Link.

Quality vs. Quantity

It could be that the nature of technological change isn’t causing the slowdown but a shift in values. It could be that in an industrial economy people develop a materialist mind-set and believe that improving their income is the same thing as improving their quality of life. But in an affluent information-driven world, people embrace the postmaterialist mind-set. They realize they can improve their quality of life without actually producing more wealth.

Analysis: Quality growth is slower. But growth nonetheless. Stop measuring it in the old quantitative ways.

Link.

Black Hat Downs the Pretty Penney

Does the collective wisdom of the Web really say that Penney has the most essential site when it comes to dresses?And bedding? And area rugs? And dozens of other words and phrases?

Analysis: JC Penney’s black hat approach to SEO earns wrath of Google (as it should).

Link.

Evolution explained 500 times over

This video is builds on that idea. It shows 500 people trying to do what should be a very simple task: tracing over an existing line. But as each person copies the previous person’s effort, the original straight line morphs into a chaotic mess of random squiggles. But it can be used to demonstrate evolution in action.

A Sequence of Lines Traced by Five Hundred Individuals from clement valla on Vimeo.

Analysis: You still don’t have to believe in evolution for it to be true.

Link.

Posted in the internet as we see it | Tagged | 2 Comments

Good Call

I found myself talking loudly the other night. I do this. It’s my style. I’m a loud talker. I can’t help myself. I can’t help myself especially when I get excited about something. On this particular occasion I was talking about my newfound love of the book “Start With Why” by Simon Sinek. After enthusiastically bloviating about the central tenet of the book, I shifted the conversation into a story about Simon and me. I don’t know Simon. Simon doesn’t know me. But he recently made a connection with me and thus the relationship was fostered, such as it is, a book review and a voice mail later.

Listen:

Now imagine what it is I might have said, loudly, to the friends indulging my latest loud treatise on the Internet as we see it.

Posted in the internet as we see it | Tagged | 1 Comment

Web 3.0: Beyond the Limits of Imagination

I like the parting lines of this video (coined Web 3.0 by its creator, which serves a primer for understanding The Semantic Web).

If we end up creating all of the things I can imagine, we’ll have failed.
-Time Berners-Lee

Web 3.0 from Kate Ray on Vimeo.

Posted in the internet as we see it | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Aunt Mary’s Haikus

When the death knell of newspapers was but an echo in the valleys of the Internet along comes Apple. Apple doing the Apple thing by at once re-inventing a market and resurrecting its potential. The print world – itself in shambles – was the first Apple courtier. As an independent publisher, we’re still waiting for our seat at the table. Until then, we have Kindle; we have PDF. But the real winner here are consumers.

Whether you’re Tina Brown pitting the Daily Beast against The Establishment or Gina Trapani giving completely in to the idea of copyleft, consumers are clearly getting better, faster, cheaper access to high quality written work. This is the point that publishers and the literary world lament the most. We saw what consumers did to network news – they brought us Twitter and Chelsea Lately, where low brow rules.

I understand the highbrow lament. Or at least I think I do. In a world where anyone can publish, then who’s to decide what deserves our attention? That’s the lament, right? Jason Epstein in the New York Review of Books puts it better:

Digitization makes possible a world in which anyone can claim to be a publisher and anyone can call him- or herself an author. In this world the traditional filters will have melted into air and only the ultimate filter—the human inability to read what is unreadable—will remain to winnow what is worth keeping in a virtual marketplace where Keats’s nightingale shares electronic space with Aunt Mary’s haikus. That the contents of the world’s libraries will eventually be accessed practically anywhere at the click of a mouse is not an unmixed blessing. Another click might obliterate these same contents and bring civilization to an end: an overwhelming argument, if one is needed, for physical books in the digital age.

The argument can be made that readers don’t give a crap either way. They want Aunt Mary and Keats both. Each is creative in their own right. There is a time for everything, after all. But where does that leave the industry? First, we can agree that even from a supplier perspective, the printed word is in a kind of free-fall. Here’s a graph for US print revenue growth in the last five years:

Even still, I see some hope for printed matter. We have a bias here because we are publishers. Our book is available in both electronic and dead tree formats. One is decidedly more expensive than the other. But both are imminently sharable. Whether you’re downloading or thumbing through the content we’ve got, we want you to share it. Indeed, to compete with Daily Beast, we need both a good product AND open access to it. We just don’t have the eyeballs they do. Nor do we have the distribution of The Establishment.

Which brings me back to Apple. It’s great that they’re breathing some life back into The Establishment. I love my LA Times and will buy the iPad subscription as soon as it’s available. I love the books I get at Borders but I may find myself buying fewer of them at Borders after all. Which is only fair. Did you know that Borders and Amazon get 50% of every book sold? Are they adding equal value as the publisher? What about the writer – whose revenues are only a portion of the half the publisher receives. Apple Bookstore and Kindle Editions take a smaller percentage, which is a start, but not what makes publishing really valuable for the writer today.

What makes publishing interesting for the writer is that there are fewer barriers to entry. And with fewer obstructions also come fewer ass-kissers. Not fewer fans. But fewer people who are paid to prop up the talent and prove the industry experience. Ask any writer not named Steven King and they’ll tell you they love having a publisher but wish they weren’t at their mercy. Which is to say, they want the marketing and distribution a publisher can offer. But do they have to make so little money?

And there are academics. If anyone can self-publish, then is the “publish or perish” model still valid?

So many questions not even the likes of Steve Jobs can answer. What we do know for certain is that where there is disruption there will be innovation. Not just technical innovation either. I mean literary innovation. I foresee the rise of flash fiction (i.e. very, very short stories) and poetry in this new digital paradigm. I see writers taking distribution into their own hands – spending more time on Amazon, Goodreads, and Apple’s iBookstore interacting with readers. I see them tweeting. Even if it is low-brow.

Posted in lessons learned in the trenches, on publishing, the internet as we see it | 1 Comment

Google Drops Support for IE 5&6

Also in the mail this morning is a nastygram from Google to Microsoft. Why it came to me is somewhat a mystery. Therefore I feel I must relay its contents. They are:

Dear Google Apps admin,​
In order to continue to improve our products and deliver more sophisticated features and performance, we are harnessing some of the latest improvements in web browser technology.  This includes faster JavaScript processing and new standards like HTML5.  As a result, over the course of 2010, we will be phasing out support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 as well as other older browsers that are not supported by their own manufacturers.
We plan to begin phasing out support of these older browsers on the Google Docs suite and the Google Sites editor on March 1, 2010.  After that point, certain functionality within these applications may have higher latency and may not work correctly in these older browsers. Later in 2010, we will start to phase out support for these browsers for Google Mail and Google Calendar.
Google Apps will continue to support Internet Explorer 7.0 and above, Firefox 3.0 and above, Google Chrome 4.0 and above, and Safari 3.0 and above.
Starting this week, users on these older browsers will see a message in Google Docs and the Google Sites editor explaining this change and asking them to upgrade their browser.  We will also alert you again closer to March 1 to remind you of this change.
In 2009, the Google Apps team delivered more than 100 improvements to enhance your product experience.  We are aiming to beat that in 2010 and continue to deliver the best and most innovative collaboration products for businesses.
Thank you for your continued support!
Sincerely,
The Google Apps team

Dear Google Apps admin,​

In order to continue to improve our products and deliver more sophisticated features and performance, we are harnessing some of the latest improvements in web browser technology.  This includes faster JavaScript processing and new standards like HTML5.  As a result, over the course of 2010, we will be phasing out support for Microsoft Internet Explorer 6.0 as well as other older browsers that are not supported by their own manufacturers.

We plan to begin phasing out support of these older browsers on the Google Docs suite and the Google Sites editor on March 1, 2010.  After that point, certain functionality within these applications may have higher latency and may not work correctly in these older browsers. Later in 2010, we will start to phase out support for these browsers for Google Mail and Google Calendar.

Google Apps will continue to support Internet Explorer 7.0 and above, Firefox 3.0 and above, Google Chrome 4.0 and above, and Safari 3.0 and above.

Starting this week, users on these older browsers will see a message in Google Docs and the Google Sites editor explaining this change and asking them to upgrade their browser.  We will also alert you again closer to March 1 to remind you of this change.

In 2009, the Google Apps team delivered more than 100 improvements to enhance your product experience.  We are aiming to beat that in 2010 and continue to deliver the best and most innovative collaboration products for businesses.

Thank you for your continued support!

Sincerely,

The Google Apps team

The writing on the wall here is that Google isn’t happy about supporting the few of us who have not upgraded because it poses a serious security threat. Our own Jon Gallagher backs up the claim that any of our clients doing business online should seriously consider dropping support for IE6 and below explicitly. We’re glad Google is helping us tell this story too. While the Google apps ecosystem is catering to a more tech-savvy and security-conscious group online. What’s more it’s planting a flag firmly in the ground for the open-source alternatives in Firefox and Safari. The browser wars go on. But as more of our work is done online, less of it will be done with Microsoft.

Posted in the internet as we see it | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

iWant Relief

I want 3 iPads. One each for me and my wife – to use a Kindle-like device. And one for my son, who’s two years old, to use as an ebook reader/portable video player/personal gaming device. Say what you want about parenting with high-tech – the kid is going to be a hacker by the time he’s four whether we try or not. Still, I worry the iPad it’s not rugged enough for him – as he’s prone to destroying anything that’s not nailed, wedged, or firmly fixed in place. In the battle between his CAT earth mover and the iPad… Let’s just say the winner will be wearing Carharts.

For me and my wife, I worry that we’ll get into the habit of buying our books in the iBookstore only to not be able to take our books to the beach. Living in San Diego, this is a more practical lament than a fleeting one. We have a pile of magazines and newspapers we gratefully read and then recycle. The books we keep. I’ll miss filling my shelves with spoils from trips to the used bookstore.

Talking with a colleague this morning, he asked me if I would buy an iPad. I told him yes, for sure, at least one. After that, I’m not so sure.

“Why?” he asked.

Inner monologue: To have at home. It’s a fun device. I can imagine using more apps, reading books, and not having to fire up the laptop to surf the web. I’ll have to test it with David to see if he’s ready for one. But I think he’d love it too for the movies.

But when it comes down to it, I just said, “I really just wanted a better Kindle.”

I don’t own a Kindle. I’ve wanted to own a Kindle. But I couldn’t get past the form factor. What a drag to use, I thought. I’m the guy waiting for Apple to make eBook readers fun and more than just a reader. Yeah, that’s me.

“So you’ll spend $500 for the iPad but you won’t spend $250 for a Kindle?”

Guilty as charged. I won’t pay a penny for something that I don’t want. But if you show me something I want, I can be relieved of much more.

Posted in product reviews, the internet as we see it | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Wikipedia on the iPhone

Burning the midnight oil last night, I got to watching my new favorite Late Night variety show Chelsea Lately. I decided I’d do a little research and find out just who this Chelsea is. Turns out she’s quite famous, a successful writer and (this I already knew) funny. I’d heard about her books and hadn’t heard about her husband. All this from the new WAP version of the wikipedia. Check it out.

img_0221

img_0222

img_0223

img_0224

img_0225

img_0226

N.B. We are running a WAP version of our site as well.

Posted in product reviews, the internet as we see it | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

What is Fail Whale?


What is Fail Whale?.

This page is a collection of a lot of user generated images for the Twitter Fail Whale. It also answers the question above. I think this is a great example of two measures we have an eye for when we help companies develop products.

First: failure is a means to the goal and should not be avoided per se. Failures help you carve out your market because it is through failing (and failing fast, as I like to say) that we learn the correct path to success.

Second: spreadability. This is a term that Henry Jenkins uses frequently to describe how users generate content. It’s a term that most people mean when they say “UGC” or “Viral Content” and it simply refers to the ability of a meme to be spread without the encoded original message getting distorted. Not only is Twitter “spreadable” but even its longstanding “fails” are worth sharing. 

What we as product developers can glean from this lesson is that once a product makes it into pop culture, expect to lose direct control of the message. And that even a culture that gently pokes fun at the product by highlighting its shortcomings is in its own way a loving culture. We tease those we love, after all. Why should it be any different for products we love?

Posted in lessons learned in the trenches, product development, the internet as we see it | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Architecting Virtual Municipal Space

Our industry is rife with comparisons to architecture. We create “site maps” and “scaffolds” all the time. It’s inspiring to know that the building of virtual spaces and real spaces face the same challenges – time, budget and will-power being paramount among them. Take, for instance, the building of the British Library. 37 years of continuous deployment, never knowing if there would be budget the next year or not. But eventually, they figured it out. What a beauty it is.

The British Library benefits from historical revisionism today as well as government support from yesterday. It’s a pity now that so much of our efforts in refining web experiences for government-run destinations receives only a portion of the resources. Perhaps disproportionately small budgets given the amount of work virtual spaces could in fact do were they constructed correctly and with an eye for permanence.

Look at the following. While you do, ask yourself what a grand, public space would look like online?


Inspired by “Stacks. Readers. Staff.”

Posted in the internet as we see it | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment