More web nonsense I don't need but will probably sign-up for anyway

Google has recently announced Latitude. This service allows you to track your friend's location using Google Maps. At first blush, I would categorize this service much like Twitter, as one of the dumbest services on the Web.

I'm a bit of a hypocrite when it comes to Twitter. I use it to update my Facebook status from my cell phone. As yet, though, I don't see how Latitude will provide a similar benefit and I don't think my friends will care about my exact location. Maybe my boss can use it to see how freely I come and go.

Latitude smacks a little like Big Brother. Google is famous for its' don't be evil mantra, but it this type of information will provide a lot of temptation for misuse. Privacy advocates will hate the service. In the end, joining and sharing the information will be voluntary, so I guess users will make their own trouble.

As for me, I'll kick the tires a bit, but you can bet that the service will be turned on my kids phones.

Twitter gives up on Instant Messaging (for now)

Twitter, one of Web 2.0's most pointless sites, is giving up on their Instant Messaging capability. According to their status page, Twitter is changing the classification of the feature from something needing a fix to something they will build. Apparently their implementation of the feature is neither scalable nor reliable.

Twitter's existence is based on their invention of "micro-blogging." Micro blogs are short notes posted in response to the question "what are you doing." Beyond the concept of a micro-blog Twitter makes it easy to submit updates through their web site or via an SMS message. Instant messaging is simply another way to post the tiny blogs.

The relevance of Twitter has to come into question. Certainly Facebook's news feed serves the same purpose, and is much more common. In fact, most of my Twitter posting are made through the Twitter Facebook application. Maybe it's me, but I believe the real value to Twitter is it's ability to post comments via several easy to use methods. Instant messaging is one of those sources and should be an urgent capability to add. Otherwise the company will lose any relevance to others providing a similar service as part of a greater offering.

Once You’re Lucky

I often pick books based on reviews from Wired Magazine. This was true when I picked up Once You're Lucky, Twice You're Good. In Mark Horowitz's review, he claimed that "Sarah Lacy…hangs with [entrepreneurs] them, gains their trust, and gets the goods. No other recent chronicle delivers such intimate, behind-the-scene glimpses into Silicon Valley startup life." It's an entertaining read reminiscent of Accidental Empires.

My issue with the current crop of valley startups has little to do with Sarah Lacy's book, although her tales reinforce my opinion. The problem is very few of the companies actually provide a site that is useful. Even Facebook, the current reigning king of Web 2.0, doesn't help its members solve problems or get things done. Of course my days of finding a good off-campus kegger with lots of girls are long past. As Twitter, Slide, or Ning they seem even less useful.

What's interesting about these sites, though, and the stories Sarah wraps around them, is the underlying technology. Maybe an old-timer like myself doesn't see the benefit of social networking. I do see where collaboration and go anywhere sites can be very useful. I'm expecting a new wave of web startups that take Web 2.0 into truly commercially viable areas.

Thoughts on some Web 2.0 Sites

The expression Web 2.0 has been with us so long that we can consider it a Tired term. Founded on the principles of collaboration, and built on highly interactive technology (read AJAX), Web 2.0 sites represent the post bubble rebirth of an industry. Some of these sites offer fairly valuable services and some of them are nonsense. Here are my thoughts…

Facebook is seen as the company with the most potential for long term success. I've been using the site almost daily for over a month and I can honestly say that "I don't get it". Sure, I'm a bit of a dinosaur, having attended college (both degrees) long before social networking came to the web. But in all my use of the site over the last several weeks, it hasn't helped me accomplish anything. Facebook has been pretty successful at positioning itself as a platform for micro-applications. Here again, I don't get it. I've tried many of the applications and always end up with the same thought…"so what?". I read somewhere that everyone eventually has an "ah-ha" moment with social networking; I'm still waiting for mine with Facebook.

On the contrary I saw the benefit to LinkedIn the day I started using it nearly five years ago. This site has helped me find work, consultants, and business leads. I've heard it called social networking for business people, but there's really very little that social about it. The site generally prevents people from contacting strangers, at least without an introduction. Ironically, you can pay money to override this fundamental aspect of the site. Paying members have access to InMail messages and can reach out to people directly. Anyone in a career should be active on LinkedIn.

Plaxo is an odd hybrid of Facebook and LinkedIn. I actually avoided using Plaxo for sometime, opting instead for GoodContacts, but when GoodContacts looked like they weren't going to make it, I switched loyalties. Plaxo suffers from an identity crisis. It started as a convenient way of managing business and personal contacts online. I use it as my main address book, and sync Outlook, my Blackberry, and other sites to Plaxo. Somewhere along the way, though, the site morphed into Plaxo Pulse. The new site is a clone of Facebook, right down to the page layout and color scheme. I still use it to keep my address list, but I don't think this company will survive.

Geni is a cute social networking site for families. I checked it out after reading Once You're Lucky. This site is actually pretty good. It is easy to use and has all the capabilities needed to stay in touch with your extended family. Nonetheless I feel this site is doomed. I make this judgment simply because no one seems to know anything about it. My family is so tired of receiving web site invitations from me that they've all but ignored the Geni invites. And without active participation from my family, the site loses its' usefulness. Add in the fact that there is no subscription or advertising; I have no clue how the site expects to earn revenue.

Twitter is dumbest idea I've ever seen. Still, it's pretty addictive. I checked it out because I am starting a project that requires a similar SMS interface. My project, however, will be useful, where Twitter simply generates noise.

I have a love/hate relationship with Flickr. I use the site a lot by storing all my family's pictures there. I uploaded so many pictures that I had to buy a subscription. Flickr was a leader in establishing sharing, but now its UI seems dated. I find it difficult to use, or at least difficult to learn how to use. And I am disappointed in the site's "badge" ability; that led me to seek alternatives including Slide.

Krugle on the other hand is one of the best and most useful sites I've found. Of course you have to be a programmer to appreciate the site's benefits, but for those of us developing software for a living the site is amazing. Forget Google Code Search; Krugle is the place to go for snippets of code and projects in the public domain.

YouTube is silly and innocent fun. If you're reading this far into this post, then you already know all about YouTube.

Some people claim that Google Docs is meant to replace Microsoft Office. Google, of course, denies such claims by saying that Google Docs are meant to augment productivity suites. Frankly I don't care about the pending Microsoft vs Google wars. I like Office and I like Google Docs. I've read that Google Docs is not as feature rich as Office, and certainly the Google toolbar has nowhere near the number of buttons as the Office Ribbon. That said, I've never looked for a feature in Google Docs that it didn't have. I guess that says something for the feature bloat in Office.

Everybody uses maps online. MapQuest was amazing when it first came out. Google, however, really lifted the bar when it introduced Google Maps. Now all the map providers have full screen maps that pan as you drag them. They all have satellite pictures and zoom. Google has Street View and Live and Birdseye View. Of Google, Live, Yahoo! and MapQuest, I like Live best. But they're all good.

I checked out Slide because I wanted a cool way to show pictures on my web site. Slide has some cool features, but I was a little disappointed. I can't imagine building an entire business around slide shows so I don't look for this site to last long.

Popfly is Microsoft's site to demonstrate how cool their Silverlight technology is. It's kind of cool for developers building mashups and who don't mind using Microsoft technology. That's probably a pretty small group, but since I am technology agnostic, I use it and think it's a pretty cool site.

Delicious on the other hand is about as uncool as you can get. I think the site is ugly and serves little purpose. On the contrary, Trailfire, is of similar ilk but is amazing friendly and helpful. What a difference a thoughtful UI can make. Unfortunately, Delicious is the better bet for longevity in this space as they have the backing of Yahoo! and some web 2.0 brand recognition.

Stay away from Fanbox

I am normally a proponent, and sometimes early adopter, of new technologies including Web Sites and Web Services. I'm also a believer in the value of personal networking. I have accounts all over the web including Face book, LinkedIn, and Plaxo Pulse. I've even signed up for some of the losers such as Friendster, Naymz, and Spaces. I never had a bad experience until I came across Fanbox (notice that I refuse to link to it).

It started with an innocent looking message from a colleague; Dawn has a question for you. When I clicked on the link, I was directed to Fanbox and presented a somewhat racy question that was apparently directed at someone with a much different demographic than me. Ironically I had been introduced to Fanbox a few days early by Sterling Brown and given Sterling's reputation I was intrigued. So I clicked on an answer to the question.

Here's a clue, if you get a message about a question, don't click on it! Answering the question kicked off a wizard inviting my contacts to Fanbox. Fanbox apparently scanned my Outlook Contact list, even though I never click a link for that purpose. It then asked if I me to send a question so I immediately clicked cancel. Later I discovered that Fanbox forwarded the question to my contacts and causing me much embarrassment.

It's really a shame because the fundamental technology of Fanbox is pretty cool. They have reproduced a workstation desktop and point-and-click user interface deployed over the web. The desktop comes with storage, email, and that mimic Microsoft Windows pretty closely. Apparently a Web-based Windows environment is a solution looking for a problem, because Fanbox has jumped on the social networking bandwagon. Outside of social networking, I did not see any real value to the site. There certainly is nothing that would persuade users of Facebook or Google Docs to jump to Fanbox.

So Fanbox has resorted to tricks to obtain members. Grabbing my contact list was akin to spyware or worm tactics. Maybe someday a company with vision will snatch up the Fanbox technology and deploy it provide some real benefit. Until then, avoid Fanbox like the plague.