
I guess this is a simple one, do you think Google was the first ever Web 2.0 service? Considering we are yet to define the Web 2.0 on this site I’ll stick to the corner stones of what we currently know about the Web 2.0 and compare it to Google. And by Google, I’m referring to the Search engine, not the all encompassing beast its become over the last few years.
I am aware that this site talks alot about Google, and theres a very good reason. They are one of the leaders of the Web 2.0 pack at the moment, so I guess the logical question to ask is, when did they reach that position? I’m going to throw in a disclaimer here, these are all my thoughts and are certainly not set in stone and are open to debate (please use the comments form). With that out of the way I think the best course of action is to see what boxes Google ticks when it comes to the Web 2.0 and then what made is special compared to the competing search engines of the time.
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
Theres an interesting article over at zdnet that examines some of the code for Google’s new Calandar tool. Interestingly, they seem to uncover some placeholder code for completeable events, which point towards some form of tasking implementation coming soon. Lets hope so, and lets hope they really think through the integration this time.
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
In order to write this blog I test out many, many Web 2.0 applications, services etc etc. During this trawl through some of the better, and some of the worse Web 2.0 services I thought I’d knock up a quick list of problems I see with the Web 2.0 as it currently exists. Some of these are a bit on the vague side but as the Web 2.0 is such a diverse landscape its hard to be specific without naming names (I’ll save that for later).
So on to the list: -
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
So yeah Google has launched a calendar applicaiton to go alongside its Gmail service manouvering it towards a true Web desktop. It didn’t really come as a surprise to anyone, the launch of Google calendar has been speculated on for a while. One of the things that certainly surprised me was the lack of integration between the Google services. I can’t tell you how excited I was at the prospect of having a calendar that closely integrates with Gmail, my webmail tool of choice. It seemed like a match made in heaven, a web version of Outlook if you will. So why am I dissapointed with the current state of the two services and why am I buoyed by the possibilities that lie ahead.Personally, I like Google. I think most of their services are usefull, usable and well designed. Touch wood they also seem fairly reliable. These are the sorts of things that lead to people trusting a company, for better or for worse. This trust then becomes a hugely valuable asset. One of the main hurdles for people to overcome in moving from a local system to a web system is the fear of losing the service and with it not just availability of the service but also their data. Given Googles almost impeccable trackrecord of availability, people will be more prepared to move their data over to their huge servers. So whats this about me being dissapointed then? Well, read on…
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
Not very long ago, I wrote an article called The AJAX Sham and it was fairly critical of the way in which AJAX is used today. Not necessarily the technology but more why sites are using AJAX and how marketing types have attached themselves to the term incorrectly. Given that article I thought I should try and balance things a bit by explaining how I think AJAX should be used and why many services are missing an opportunity with the technology.
As I exlained in the earlier article, there are many sites that are using XML just for the sake of it. They aren’t actually utilising the features of XML, its ust being used as an easy to manage middleman between the Javascript and the Database. The problem with this is that the true potential of XML is not being utilised. In fact, some of the features are being subverted in order for XML to fit into this new Web 2.0 framework.
XML has gained such a strong following in the IT world because of its extensible nature, the simple human readable format and the fact that it adds a level of semantics to the data. In many AJAX implementations none of these features are being used. Thats like buying a car and using it as a table, its just such a waste. So how can we put these features to work in our AJAX implementations?
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
In case your wondering, I chose the title very carefully. A sham doesn’t necessarily mean something negative, just something dressed to appear like its something else. So why is this thing we call AJAX a sham and whats it hiding? More importantly, are we, as users/developers, being sold short? Or is it for our own good.
To answer these questions we need to look at the current implementations of AJAX and the hierarchical nature of web applications. Typically, web applications sit on a three layer architecture. These have been called many different things but essentially the boil down to a layer to deal with presentation, a layer to deal with the logic and a layer to deal with the data. An example would be HTML at the presentation layer, PHP doing the logic and a MySQL database at the back end. Previously, if you were to throw Javascript into the mix it would sit in the presentation layer. So why has this new breed of web applications changed the way we think about these layers?
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
Theres been wide spread speculation about the possibility of Google launching a calendar service and well, its here. I’ve not had much of a chance to play about with it but there was one thing that really stuck out like a sore thumb, and I’ll post on it in a minute or two. Anyway, heres the link, You’ll need a google account to get in. Drop any thoughts in the comments.
http://www.google.com/calendar
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
The eager eyed amongst you will no doubt notice that despite this sites tagline of “Demistifying the Web 2.0 Phenomenon” we don’t actually offer an explanation or definition of the Web 2.0. This isn’t an oversight, mistake or laziness. It is, in fact, an informed decision taken because I can’t make an informed decision. If you understand that after just one sentence you are probably reading this from a NASA lab with wires sticking out of your orifices. For the human amongst us, I should probably explain.
Permalink Comments (No Responses Yet) TrackBack
AJAX is certainly a hot topic at the moment which has led to a number of sites using AJAX where its not necessary or appropriate. This is similar to the situation we found ourselves in when Javascript, Images, Animated Gifs, Flash, *insert hot new thing here* and pretty much every other facet that makes up websites came into being. At the moment, this means that the sign of a good design isn’t how its used AJAX but more where its chosen not to use AJAX. We can cheat a little by following some simple rules when deciding whether to AJAXify a function or not.
Permalink Comments (One Response) TrackBack
I’m sure that, like me, you’ve jumped into the Web 2.0 world with both feet. So wheres that left you? Well, its left me with a whole bunch of bookmarks, loads of FireFox tabs and quite a bit of inefficiency. Theres alot to be said for having a desktop with all your apps at hand, something that can’t really be done when you move to a Web 2.0 world, or can it…