| CIO Blogs
IT Blog Awards |
Subscribe
RSS news feed
Add to Technorati FavoritesRecent Posts
- Google Lively is it Google Earth and Maps again?
- Ceci n'est pas un commercial
- New CTO blogger: Sean Rhody on Wireless On-site Collaboration
- SAP are Twittering, IBM are teleporting Avatars, and Google are Lively
- The Gold in Chrome
- Google Chrome
- The 2 Magics and the Hype Cycle
- Wii, Second Life, (and maybe the iPhone), it’s all coming together
- Web 2.0, Enterprise 2.0, Agile Enterprise, and Business Technology means what?
- User Expectations are being formed outside the Enterprise
Navigate
Search the blog
« A plan for ‘legacy’ in a world of change | Main | Yahoo comes up with a new twist to Social Networks »
Convergence on People rather than Devices
It has been a theme of mine, and some others, that the whole point of good solution design for Web 2.0 is people centric in comparison to the previous generations of technology. Starting with Mainframes, moving through Minis and into PC Networks each preceding generation has had the technology it was named after at the centre of any solution design. Accordingly the logic, and I expect most people’s natural reaction, is to say that the Web is at the centre of our new generation.
If I characterise solutions by the technology elements then this is true, but take a look at this a different way. How many Web 2.0 services do you belong to? Assuming that you are an active user then the answer is probably at least five and maybe as high as ten or more. Doesn’t look like getting to be less either. Now look at the number of devices, at least three is my guess; work PC, home PC and Smart Phone.
Want a wish? Yup you got it in one, devices that are all synchronised in a way that it doesn’t matter what device you are using everything is fully synchronised and a consolidation of your Web 2.0 services so that you don’t have to keep hopping from site to site, often having to re log in and out. Well doesn’t that mean you, the person, want to be at the centre of the system, and solutions should be designed accordingly?
When you think about it we are seeing a change from implementing and using a limited number of monolithic applications to selecting from a vast number of small granular services that we mostly will use as ‘services’ from a remote hosted environment. Not surprisingly this changes the perspective in terms of solution design, or more accurately the focus of usability, and as people have the power in the new model to make their own choices it follows that web services that are ‘people’ centric will win.
Which brings me to FriendFeed; the hot ‘newbie’ on the block that takes down the separations between the various parts of your Web 2.0 life. Currently it allows around thirty sites to be pulled together onto one FriendFeed page, and combines the use of people with content. One of its key aspects is the way that it uses your friends to make recommendations about the content. The theory is an extension of the Amazon principle of ‘people who bought this also bought’ to apply to your search for information. It will be interesting to see how this approach will develop. As a quick start you can get to one of the best known Web 2.0 characters Robert Scobie on FriendFeed and build up from there.
What about synchronisation of all those devices? Well I have a personal tip for you to consider for your own private use, as that’s about as good as it gets at the present, Try SugarSync who host all your files for you as a centralised version that any, and all, your popular devices can then access. Of course if you can guarantee that everything you have runs on Windows then you can use Windows Live Foldershare but with a widening use of devices I think that might be too limiting.
Posted by Andy Mulholland on May 14, 2008 | 
Digg this | 
Seed Newsvine
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.capgemini.com/cgi-bin/blog/mt-tb.cgi/435
Comments
# on May 14, 2008 6:15 PM, Niraj J said:
An interesting post. There are some other standards
formats that probably belong to this discussion.
http://www.apml.org/ - Attention profiling markup language is gaining some traction in the recommendation systems space.
Check out: http://aura.darkstar.sunlabs.com/AttentionProfile/
I am experimenting with this format for the past 2-3 months and it seems quite workable. The only problem is that this will work in consumer focussed applications where data sharing is not that big a issue.
# on May 15, 2008 1:20 AM, Jack said:
Hi Andy -
I think your wish accurately describes what is called a mesh - a synchronization model that work with multiple masters (or as you will - no master at all).
very hip, indeed - Roy Ozzie pioneered this synhmodel with Groove (which later got acquired by Microsoft and adopted in the office quite) and recently re-invented this from within his concept development team at MSFT. This time around not as a service or application, but rather as a platform.
A tech-preview of an application that utilizes this platform is hosted on http://www.mesh.com.
This time around the synchronization spec is publicly available, which allows partners to "mesh"-enable their services.
sounds like a wish come true?
# on May 15, 2008 8:24 AM, Lee Provoost said:
I think that people are still too much attached to "their" device at the moment as well. Ideally we should move to a situation where no matter where you are or what device you are using, you have your web 2.0 life at your fingertips.
A bit like the Cisco VOIP phones we have at Capgemini. You just sit at whatever desk you want, type in your login and the phone becomes yours for the day. We should have a similar thing where I can sit at just whatever computer or use whatever phone and achieve the same.
This is at least how I would like to see it :-)
# on May 15, 2008 4:41 PM, andy mulholland said:
hi lee and jack
good posts -thanks. i had forgotten the Ray Ozzie views on the topic but yup recall them now and of course it is the model we are talking about. i guess the difference is that this way we have the basic capabilities for free and the question is how do we make choices of technology that provide us individually or collectively with differentiated capabilities for advantage over competitors.