0 notes &
In the past two years the market has risen 92% (http://goo.gl/uWY2p) and unemployment is unchanged (http://goo.gl/DNpm0).
I agree this is not enough, but hell-in-a-hand-basket our country is not. (compare to the 80’s: http://goo.gl/TWiTO, http://goo.gl/yR0Pq at the same relative time)
0 notes &
I am concerned about Facebook. Their practices toward their users, developers and the internet in general are anti-web….and yet they are the most popular web site in the world. Oddly, most people don’t think (or care) how anti-web,-user,-developer,-internet Facebook as (is) been and that has made the matter that much worse. If anyone is interested, I can list out why I know all of the above is true.
What I don’t understand, however, is why there isn’t a viable Facebook alternative. In some ways, it should be “easy.” Here’s what I believe Facebook really is for 95% of its users. A place to:
That’s it. Postings and photos. All other features are used only by 5% of its users in any real way. And what makes the postings and photos work so well for Facebook? Its social graph. That’s the “list” of your friends and the people who are friends with you. The social graph is really the only thing that Facebook has that no one else has. Without the social graph, the experience of sharing posts and sharing photos is just not the same anywhere else.
What I would like, is an open alternative where I can keep my social graph (and my friends can keep theirs), so that I can bring it around to whatever service has be best photos, events, classifieds, job postings, etc. And I want to be able to change services whenever I would like, but have my social graph follow me so I don’t skip a beat. That way, I can choose services that are beneficial to its users, its developers and the web community at large.
Who has the ability to make this happen? Wouldn’t everyone want to participate in the same graph? We need choice and Facebook is no longer cutting it.
0 notes &
Facebook is influential. 500+ million users world-wide is no small number. Of the over 100 million users in the US, it is reported that 70% check Facebook at least once a day. Those are numbers that cannot be ignored. But I wonder how much of a reach Facebook really has.
Facebook has a closed-by-default ecosystem….at least culturally (not necessarily technically). Most people only allow access to their profile from friends or possibly friends-of-friends. As a result, the Facebook zone of influence is probably ~200 “friends” per user. It turns out that is a very small group of people compared to other social networks, such as blogs or Twitter. In Facebook I can only ever reach about 200 people. And because of the way I (and almost everyone I have polled) use Facebook, that number is not likely to grow. As a result, Facebook is a relatively nice, safe home for me and my friends to show the latest pictures of our kids and maybe post a NYT’s article, but that’s about it.
Compare that to Twitter or blogging. In these more open systems, any of my posts may be shared or retweeted and be seen by hundreds of people. It is happen to me a number of times already: I Tweet, it gets retweeted and the link I shared was clicked on by hundreds of people all over the world (literally). That is a system with a powerful reach.
I very much wonder how Facebook can compete - in the long run - with such reach and scale. I cannot help but think that the Facebook emperor has no clothes. What do you think?
2 notes &
Background
Google Chrome OS is an operating system and computer that does one thing and one thing only: runs the Google Chrome web browser. You cannot save photos to it. You cannot run Microsoft Word on it. There is no way to archive an email. Yes, Google Chrome OS is only good for working “in the cloud.” ….and that is probably a good thing.
Working in the Cloud
I have long argued that you can do 95% of your business while only using cloud app. And I do not mean small business, I mean big business, too. Email, documents, database systems, customer care, video conferencing can all be done in the cloud effectively.
And if you are working completely in the cloud, why do you need a “regular” computer? You do not need a CDROM or the ability to run install applications - you just need to be able to get to your cloud applications wherever you are. So Google created a platform called Chrome OS that fits perfectly in this niche. It is fast, runs on inexpesive hardware and allows you to access your cloud data when you need it.
Security, Encryption
One of the side benefits of Google’s Chrome OS is security. First of all, you do not really store any data on Chrome OS…it is all kept in the cloud instead. So Chrome OS keeps your data secure by not storing any data at all. But we all know that there are temp files and browser cache files on our computers - so what about that? Chrome OS treats that secondary data as a first class citizen and encrypts all of it. In fact, the user cannot opt out of encryption whether they would like to or not. As a result, it is impossible to extract any data from a Chrome OS computer. All of it is locked away and inaccessible.
eDiscovery
How much easier would your eDiscovery life be if your users could not store data on their computers? No emails, no contracts, no instant messages. Yeah, I though you would be interested in that. Chrome OS may very well be the best eDiscovery operating system ever created. It forces users to store data on centralized, cloud-based resources and therefore stop data sprawl all over your network.
In Practice
I have been using a prototype Google Chrome OS laptop (thank you very much Google!) and I love it. It is fast, responsive and allows me to get my work done. Even my document review platform is accessible via Google Chrome OS. And while Google has some kinks to work out before their OS hits the consumer and business markets, it is clear that this form of computer is the wave of the future - as well as a sigh of relief to eDiscovery attorneys everywhere.
0 notes &
So I have an interesting idea that uses some fun technologies:
I was testing the use of CouchDB with large datasets (millions of rows) and thought of this idea for a web app. It is really simple (you vote whether you are happy or sad), but the data slicing that results is kind of fun - especially with large datasets.
Does anyone know of a designer who would be willing to make this web app look (a lot) better?
Here’s the demonstration site:
http://www.happystatus.net/happy/app/index.html
Here is a Chrome extension I wrote for Happy Status:
https://chrome.google.com/webstore/detail/foeibicckhigfdjkjehpcbfnmeifogbh?hl=en-US#
0 notes &
I hear a lot of people discuss whether eDiscovery technology is becoming a commodity…with the implecation that pricing should follow. Heck, even I have been one of the those people.
The real question, however, is not whether eDiscovery is becoming a commodity (and here’s a spoiler: it is not - 10% will always be bespoke and very custom, thus blowing the whole thing), but rather if eDiscovery technology pricing can be predictable. Can service providers, law firms or in-house eDiscovery departments offer predictable (or capped) eDiscovery technology services?
In my opinion, the answer is a resounding yes! eDiscovery pricing can be predicable and capped - especially when dealing with volume. And isn’t that want clients want? The ability to say, “I will pay a reasonable fee, even if the case keeps growing, but I don’t want the pricing to get out of control.”
I have been a big proponent for predictable pricing for quite some time and have introduced it to my clients at my day job. What do you think? Should we stop talking about commodity pricing and, instead, focus on predictable pricing?
0 notes &
Last Year
I wrote about Google Chrome OS over a year ago. At that time, Chrome OS was in a very early alpha development release. If you knew a developer, like Hexxeh, who was nice enough to build Chrome OS and provided a good USB boot image, then you could test it out. I was geeky enough to do just that, and I gave Chrome OS high marks for potential.
Reprise
Earlier this month, Google released a beta version of Chrome OS. This time, Google actually shipped Chrome OS laptops to chosen (and lucky) developers and test users. This beta program is designed to generate interest and allow the new platform to be user-tested before an official release later in 2011.
It is hard to imagine what Google has been doing for the past year, since in many ways Chrome OS is not much better than it was a year ago. Which is to say, it is still very good. My thoughts from last year about Chrome OS came down to:
From that perspective, not much has changed. Sure, Chrome itself is simply faster, thanks to rendering engine improvements and major improvements to the already lightning fast V8 javascript engine. That said, Chrome OS is so basic that there is not much Google had to do to improve the OS.
New Thoughts
Do I have any new thoughts since last year? Yes. I am surprised to see how practical Chrome OS is for not just couch or travel surfing. Last year I thought Chrome OS would be a great computer to use while watching TV. Well, since then a couple of things happened. First, I stopped watching much TV at all. I now get most of my entertainment through the computer. Second, the launch of the iPad and the new tablet-based paradigm has supplanted laptops/netbooks as a the major on-to-couch computing platform. So, in some ways, Chrome OS is not longer all that relevant.
What has been a pleasant turn of events, however, is how practical Chrome OS is in the workplace. As long as your company is already computing in the cloud, Chrome OS makes perfect sense for a business. Why? Well, for the same reasons I stated before:
For what will likely be a mere $100-$200 per laptop, businesses can get a full-functioning laptop, operating system and security platform. Not bad. And the cost for future upgrades is only the cost of the new hardware, since user-data migration in Chrome OS is as simple as logging into a new Chrome OS computer.
Sure, Chrome OS is limited. It can only run web apps, and despite the amazing advancements of HTML5, web apps are still limited in nature. That said, Chrome OS supports Citrix and some other sort of VNC-like remote access, so rich applications can be deployed to Chrome OS users fairly easily.
The Fly in the Ointment
The big question becomes, is Cloud Computing trust worthy and will businesses adopt this new approach to computing. On this point, I think Google is making a very good bet. While many naysayers have tried to rain on the Cloud Computing parade, I have log argued that Cloud Computing is the inevitable computing platform of the future (here, here, here and here). If Google is creating the first Cloud-only OS, they will be well positioned to take advantage of the direction of the future.
What do you think about Chrome OS? I would love to hear your thoughts.
