Scripting News

Why Google launched OpenSocial

Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:26:25 GMT

Today's announcement from Facebook is the reason why Google announced OpenSocial last week. They must have gotten a leak from one of the companies that stood with Facebook, so they knew what was coming. They weren't scared of Facebook's technology, because they didn't respond with technology. They were scared because Facebook has a better advertising story than Google does. They are getting ready to offer some very premium web real estate that (pay attention now) Google can't compete with. And advertising is Google's bread and butter, advertising is to Google as operating systems are to Microsoft. They can't let somebody appear to be better than they are in advertising. Yet that's what Facebook is, better than Google in advertising.

Here's what Facebook can do.

Let's say I bought a Wii and I like it. They can tell all my friends "Dave bought a Wii and he likes it." That's a lot more likely to result in a sale than an intrusive ad like this one, that was displayed next to an email I sent to some friends about their New Networked Living Room. Google thinks I might want to buy Moroccan Lamps, or something called a Unique Shabby Chic (huh?) or Crate & Barrell bedroom furniture. Of course I tune that shit out, I don't even see it. It has zero impact.

Anyway, I was talking with Doc Searls a few minutes ago and he mentioned OpenSocial and I told him it was just a lot of noise meant to distract people from what Facebook was doing in advertising. He hadn't heard anything about it even though he was at a tech conference in Denver today and yesterday. I said there you go, Google's strategy worked. But to no effect, longterm, because Facebook has the momentum and Google, try as hard as they want to stop it, will not be able to, any more than Alta Vista or Infoseek were able to stop Google once they figured out that their lunch was eaten. Google will be around for a long time, I'm not saying they will go away, but Facebook will be around too. And Google will have a hard time catching up to them.

Long-term, however they both have problems because advertising is on its way to being obsolete. Facebook is just another step along the path. Advertising will get more and more targeted until it disappears, because perfectly targeted advertising is just information. And that's good!

8/3/06: "Information is welcome, advertising is offensive."

Venus and the Moon over Denver

Wed, 07 Nov 2007 04:43:14 GMT

By Doc Searls.

Why I delete comments

Wed, 07 Nov 2007 01:43:10 GMT

First a caveat. You don't have to agree with me, this is my opinion, and my blog, and that's what blogs are for, they're places where, if you happen to have an opinion, you can put it.

This is the mode of a blogger with comments. Defensive. Yuck!!

If you say in your comment that I'm dishonest, I will delete your comment. That's the only tool I have to work with until my new friends at Disqus give me the feature Wordpress has that allows you to queue up every post in moderation when blog comments get flamey. This technique tells the honesty-attackers in no uncertain terms that they should take their attacks somewhere else.

So if your comment got deleted it's because something in your comment required a response from me (or someone else) that says basically "I am honest." I just save us all the trouble. No need to defend myself if the attack is gone.

You may think I am dishonest, you can even say so (but be careful to be sure you're right, and have the courage to put your name on it, only cowards make personal attacks anonymously) and do it in your space not mine. Here, I want comments with ideas and information. It's okay to disagree with me, the people who say that all they did was disagree are wrong. I never delete a comment just for being disagreeable. I delete them if they challenge my honesty. I really don't like that, I think the people who do it are creepy.

Okay, good. Glad to get that out of the way.

Margareta

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 23:59:04 GMT

Let's not go overboard

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 18:27:08 GMT

Some Windows advocates are using my post about Leopard as "proof" that Vista is really what you need.

When I said Leopard feels like Windows, I meant that it locks up, disappears, freezes and crashes. That I have to trick it into doing the right thing. I wasn't paying Windows a compliment, geez, you guys need to learn how to read.

And by the way so do some of the Mac advocates. I didn't say you're having no fun with Leopard. Glad you're pleased. I wish I could gloat at how great an upgrade it was, nothing would make me happier. And btw, since writing the piece yesterday, it's been performing pretty well on all four systems I have it installed on. Maybe getting all that out in the open is just what was needed.

For the record, I've never used Vista, I don't want to, honestly I'd rather live in Bucharest than use Vista. Not today's Bucharest, which I hear is actually pretty nice, I'm talking about the Bucharest of Ceausescu. The one who taught Cheney and Bush all they know about torture.

Loic Le Diplomat

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 17:17:57 GMT

Update: Loic wonders what you would ask or tell President Bush if you had 3 minutes with him.

I recorded a Twittergram with what I'd say.

I'm not happy with Leopard

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 00:05:00 GMT

I've given Leopard a chance, but it's pretty clear, this is not a good operating system release.

I've been out of the Mac loop for most of the last decade, just got back in a bit over 2 years ago. I don't know if early OS releases are generally as crappy as this one, but I wasn't prepared for where we're at now. If I had known, I would have waited, instead of upgrading most of my Macs to the new system.

Talking with a friend a few days ago, he asked what I thought of Leopard. He had installed the new version, like me, the first day it came out. "I'm not liking it," I said. He said something that was simple, profound and revealing: "It's like Windows." It is. It's that unpleasant to use. It disappears for long periods of time. Systems that didn't used to crash now crash regularly. On one system three hard disks were rendered unusable, and I lost a couple of full days restoring them (luckily I had good backups). The user interface is quirky. The new networking interface is a big step backward. The firewall moved and lost features! That's simply never done, you don't charge customers to remove features, esp security features. I think Apple doesn't understand how many people depend seriously on their Macs.

To Apple, I left Windows because it held my time and work in low regard. I was happy with the Mac because it seemed reliable. Now it seems my friend was right, I'm using Windows again, and I'm not happy about it.

Tree scene

Tue, 06 Nov 2007 05:35:44 GMT

RSS 2.0 comments element

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 19:24:20 GMT

RayS on Twitter asked why it is that more feed readers don't support the <comments> element in RSS 2.0. Interestingly, less than two hours before, I had added the element to the Scripting News feed. It's appropriate because there are now per-element comments here, people who subscribe should have the benefit in addition to people who read this blog in a web browser.

Truth is that some feed readers do support the comments element. All of mine do, dating back to Radio 8.0 shipped in January 2002, which is still my daily reader. It's really a simple feature, not very hard to implement. If an item has a comments element, it's represented as a little pencil in the right margin. Click on it and you go directly to the comments.

Maybe by writing about it here we'll find out that others already support it, and maybe encourage others to add support.

Disqus progress

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:45:26 GMT

We seem to have adopted the Disqus guys, helping them evolve their product to better suit our needs.

It's a win-win because I'm getting a better comment system, and so are they.

Yesterday I asked for an XMLization of my site's comments, and this morning I have them, and can provide more feedback.

Here's where you go to see the feedback and any ensuing discussion.

Google announces their phone

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 17:45:20 GMT

Three word comment: I want one!

A TwitterGram, recorded through my iPhone, explains why Google's phone will be important, and why I want one.

My email address got cut off at the end, darn it, it's dave dot winer at gmail dot com.

Remember the social camera?

Mon, 05 Nov 2007 14:56:11 GMT

In June, on a trip to Italy, I wanted a copy of a picture a stranger was taking. "What if his camera, as it was taking the picture, also broadcast the bits to every other camera in range. My camera, sitting in my napsack would detect a picture being broadcast, and would capture it. (Or my cell phone, or iPod.)"

Then on August 29, a review in the NY Times of the Fujifilm Z10fd said it could beam photos to other cameras that support the IRSimple protocol. Unfortunately the camera wouldn't ship until October. Well, it's now November, the camera is shipping. Yet none of the reviews on Amazon mention its social feature. I was thinking of getting one, but then what's the point if no one else has it? According to the reviews it's a fairly ordinary digital camera otherwise. (Though it has a "blog mode" which is mentioned but not adequately explained in the video ad.)

So -- do you think this this baby bootstraps? Are social cameras here now, or a thing of the future?

Today's links

Sun, 04 Nov 2007 17:55:13 GMT

Amyloo spent the day studying OpenSocial.

Mark Cuban suggests that Facebook license their API.

Steven Levy on what it's like to work at Google.

NY Times's BlogRunner has an RSS 2.0 feed; I'm subscribed.

Feedback for disqus

Sun, 04 Nov 2007 17:35:12 GMT

First, overall I like the way it works, but I'd like to see some improvements (or maybe pointers if I missed a feature).

1. WordPress has a very good feature that allows you to set a pref that requires a commenter to get approval the first time he or she posts. I want that here too.

2. I'd like an option to receive a copy of all comments via email. I think this feature exists, but I haven't been able to find a way to turn it on.

3. Spam hasn't been a problem yet, but it will be. What has disqus done to prepare for this?

4. I want to be able to maintain a copy of all the comments on my server in case I decide to switch later, and I'd like it to be in a format that a competitor can import. At some point, if this feature isn't there, I will switch to one that offers this feature. I don't support data lock-in.

To the disqus people, please don't send me private email, just respond in the comments here. Thanks.

Russell Beattie asks Obvious Question 2.0

Sun, 04 Nov 2007 04:20:28 GMT

Russ asks: Where's the OpenSocial container API?

I love Russ because he cuts through all the BS and gets right to the core, most basic question, and he doesn't care who he pisses off. That's my kind of developer. You can't lie to the compiler, when the bits hit the road, you gotta know what garbage goes in and what garbage comes out.

(Ahh programmer's humor!)

In other words, suppose I wanted to compete with Google, MySpace, Plaxo and LinkedIn, well, where's the spec that shows me how to do that?

Well, of course I don't know, they aren't communicating with riffraff like me, but I have some experience with this kind of stuff, so I can hazard a guess. If they publish a spec,all kinds of projects will likely get started to enable the API in (just for the sake of argument): Drupal, WordPress, Twitter, Pownce, Jaiku, Scripting News (why not add widgets to a random blog), CNN, The New York Times, well you get the idea. There might be lots of implementations very quickly. And that would be it for changes. It would be frozen de facto, they'd have to live with what they have, which given how quickly it was thrown together, probably isn't very good. Not the kind of stuff you'd like to support for the next decade or two.

Or maybe they would break everyone, something guaranteed to make them a lot of enemies, much the way Microsoft did, and they were good at migration of APIs.

Google is good at doing AJAXy web UIs, they make users happy, but they're not very good at APIs. This one is a loser, for sure. That's the answer to Russ's question. It's probably not malice that keeps them from releasing details to everyone outside their club, it's pragmatism. They have to try to hold on to it to keep it from becoming even more of a mess than it already is.

Just my opinion, for what it's worth. I've been wrong many times before.

Google's phone should be good

Sat, 03 Nov 2007 22:46:57 GMT

While I think Google's plan to undermine Facebook was a bad idea that flopped, I think they should be able to design a phone that, like Apple's iPhone, is a necessary accessory for the future-minded geek.

One of the things we like the most about mobile devices is that they can be used to access Internet applications, but neither the Blackberry or the iPhone have hit the sweet spot with web access, imho -- but Google's design process should yield something not ony usable but uniquely powerful. Combining search with email, maps and news is something they should be able to make work better than their competitors because they've done it so well on the web.

When news organizations see what Google's up to, I suspect they will be more interested in what we've been doing with the NY Times.

And btw, I'm not selling my Apple stock.

Trying out disqus.com

Sat, 03 Nov 2007 21:19:08 GMT

I got an email a couple of weeks ago asking if I'd like to try out a new way to do weblog comments, from disqus.com. I thought about it, and decided to give it a try. Not sure whether I'm ready to provide an outlet for people's anger so easily, but let's see what happens.

To begin with the comments only appear on the story page, not on the Scripting News home page. Just click on the blue arrow to get to the story page.

What is it like to work at Google?

Fri, 02 Nov 2007 07:00:00 GMT

Sometime back in the late 80s I was invited to give a talk at Apple, along with John Markoff, who was at the SF Examiner at the time. I think he went first, they received him politely, then I got up and was shocked at the anger I heard back from the people in the room. It scared me, I was totally unprepared for it.

That was the first time that I experienced the disconnect with what it must feel like to be inside a big, famous, young, successful technology company, and what I thought it must feel like. It's taken a long time for the glamor to wear off for me. As recently as 2004, I thought it would be nice to work inside one of these big companies, believe it or not. Now I see it very differently.

Think about what it must have been like to work at Apple in the late 80s. People at the highest level of the company come and go, when they come they get beautiful offices, great benefits, unlimited expense accounts. They're quoted in the press as if they were gods, but you know better. When they show up at meetings they are fools, they have no idea how the products work, they avoid making the decisions you need them to, instead they throw all your cards in the air at will, and do it often. When they leave they get huge bonuses, golden parachutes, and another cushy job at another tech company. Meanwhile your options are worth shit, you haven't gotten a raise in two years, and they just had layoffs, and a bunch of your friends aren't there anymore, and you have to do their jobs too.

And then this developer asshole walks in and tells you how you're fucking up.

Don't get me started about the developers. They hardly do any work, they get quoted in the press all the time as if they're gods, and make millions of dollars, and I do all the work, and I don't get shit and no one cares what I think.

Okay that was what it was like to be at Apple in the late 80s.

I have no idea what it must be like to work at Google today, but I can see some things about it, and guess at why it is that way.

First, there's a sense that everyone, if they could, would like to be at Google. The food is good, they pay for almost everything you need in life. It's like a college campus, you get to do interesting stuff, and they take care of all the worries. In another way it's as if you never left your mother's house.

For some people, maybe many, just going to work is making them rich. Some of them are being made very rich. Who wouldn't want to be rich.

Therefore if you don't work at Google it must be because you're not good enough.

So one thing they don't have in huge supply at Google is humility.

The laws of software apply equally everywhere and the number one law of software, of course is Murphy's Law. And one of the big things it teaches is humility. Look everywhere for possible errors. Be completely paranoid about security holes, infinite loops, databases that crash, and things you may have overlooked

Yet, this latest episode from Google seems to completely lack humility.

Someday someone will write the Microserfs for Google and then the rest of us (who don't work there, and don't want to, and never will) can have some idea of how they got to be this way.

In the meantime I'm very interested in real human stories of what it's like to be at Google today.

Update: A thread with some interesting comments about this piece on ycombinator.com.

Netflix is driving me crazy!

Fri, 02 Nov 2007 19:23:48 GMT

I don't have an HD-DVD player.

(Actually I do but it never works.)

So when I order a movie from Netflix, I don't want the HD-DVD format, I want the DVD format.

They actually tell you what formats each movie is available in, but I can't find a way to tell it I want the regular DVD, not the HD one, so guess what, I always end up with the HD one.

Arrrrrrrrrrrgh.

Here's a screen shot.

Please tell me what I'm missing.

TIA.

Update: Bradc found the pref that was set wrong.

This says it all

Fri, 02 Nov 2007 03:55:44 GMT

Dare Obasanjo, who works at Microsoft, says that Google has transformed itself into "Microsoft of Old."

It seems true, with a bit of Sun and Java thrown in as well.

It's the hurt of the software industry, moving away from serving users, and getting spun in its own drama.

It's not much longer before something totally new sprouts, quietly, out of sight, and re-energizes the people who care about the purpose of technology, which is to enable and empower, not limit and cripple.

We lifted Google on our shoulders as our vision of what was good about the web. They're so far from that ideal these days.