October 2005  
Desktop Applications: Web 2.0's Dancing Bear

People are developing desktop applications that run in browsers. There's email, word processing, IM, even spreadsheets for heaven's sake. While I think these are pretty cool and technical marvels, I also think they're dancing bears: it's not that they do it well, it's that they do it at all.

Here's the business plan for most of these types of applications: "It's just like your desktop, but using the power of the web, you can do it anywhere." Umm, no, that isn't the real power of the web. The web's strength lies in collective actions and data (e.g. Amazon's "People who bought this also bought..."), social communities across wide distances (Yahoo Groups), aggregation of many sources of data (RSS feeds), near real-time access to timely data (stock quotes, news), and easy publishing of content from one to many (blogs, Flickr). Few of these desktoppy applications take advantage of those things because at their core, they were designed for a different medium, a solitary computer.

Besides, in this era of laptops, wifi, web-enabled phones, and Blackberries, being able to have your spreadsheet at an internet cafe is becoming more and more an edge case, not the norm. It certainly isn't enough of a differentiator to make me move from my desktop apps to the web.

All this time spent porting over desktop apps to the web would probably be better spent building web-native applications, that do take advantage of the web's strengths. Instead of looking to the past, why not to the future?

Originally posted on Monday, October 31, 2005 | Link | Comments (0) | Trackback (0)


Dancing for Grandma

There's a moment in just about every project when you have to do something ridiculous to appease someone: a design direction to try that you know is going to be totally unworkable, an extra presentation for a big boss, some model or power point slide to explain the obvious, or a really unnecessary meeting. Luckily I've heard a great new phrase for this sort of silliness, to be used when it arises: "Dance for Grandma!" It's usually accompanied by rhythmic hand-clapping. Brilliant.

Originally posted on Thursday, October 27, 2005 | Link | Comments (1) | Trackback (0)



I thought I was a real badass this week, coming up with a new word: creageous, a mashup of creative and courageous. But of course, others had come up with it before...

Originally posted on Friday, October 21, 2005 | Link | Comments (1) | Trackback (0)


Interaction Design Group Association

A lot of people (not me) have worked very hard over the last two years to make one man's rant and another guy's subsequent idea a reality. The Interaction Design Group has now incorporated as a non-profit organization, the Interaction Design Association. I sit on the Board of this new entity with many other fine people. Wish us luck.

Originally posted on Sunday, October 16, 2005 | Link | Comments (0) | Trackback (1)


Worst Book Jacket Ever

This book jacket doesn't imply sci-fi speculative fiction classic, it screams gay porn. From the 80s.

Not helping things: the title (The Man in the High Castle) and the author's name: Philip K. Dick.

| Link | Comments (0) | Trackback (0)


Keywords for Web 2.0

Want to start a Web 2.0 company? Here's the keywords you need to sprinkle through your presentations:

  • social
  • tagging
  • network
  • collaboration
  • user-generated content
  • RSS
  • API
  • platform

I've heard or spoken to at least three different companies lately who do "social networking software" and all three meant something totally different by that term.

Originally posted on Monday, October 10, 2005 | Link | Comments (1) | Trackback (0)


Content in Web Services

As I mentioned in an earlier post on Service vs. Product Design, services are easier to replicate and improve upon than products. Similarly, I think services, especially web services, are easier to create and improve upon than content. My new law, Saffer's Law, is this:

It's easier to create a content aggregator than it is to create content.

Hundreds of aggregators can grab content from the New York Times, but it's much harder to create the content of the New York Times. It probably wouldn't be hard (at least on the front-end) to make a better auction service than Ebay: the trick would be to move their millions of users (and their content) over to it. Just ask Amazon Auctions.

Now certainly creating (and constantly maintaining and upgrading) a great service is no easy task. But at the center of most web services is a kernel of content (this can be user-supplied) and that has to be good or the service is junk. You wouldn't trade from an online brokerage if their stock quotes were bad. You wouldn't go to Google if their search results sucked.

Similarly, at the center of most offline services is a product, and if the product sucks, no great service is going to save it for too long. If Starbuck's coffee tasted like Maxwell House, you wouldn't buy very much of it.

In the cavalcade of hype around Web 2.0, we shouldn't forget that a focus on services at the expense of the content that helps fuel them, could leave us with some very shallow services.

Originally posted on Sunday, October 2, 2005 | Link | Comments (1) | Trackback (0)


The Web 2.0 Metaphor

While I like marketing-readiness of the term Web 2.0, a part of the metaphor doesn't ring true to me, namely this: in software, version 2.0 is a replacement for version 1.0; you usually don't keep version 1.0 around. With Web 2.0, however, Web 1.0 (and 1.1, 1.2, etc.) are still around and likely will be for a long time. Web 2.0 isn't replacing what we have, only supplementing and augmenting it. And living alongside it.

All this AJAX stuff is pretty cool, but we shouldn't forget that one click away is still certs.com...

Originally posted on Saturday, October 1, 2005 | Link | Comments (1) | Trackback (0)



« September 2005 | Main | November 2005 »

February 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
  O Danny Boy is About Me, Dan Saffer, and has my Portfolio, Resumé, Blog, and some Extras. It also has the blog I kept of my graduate studies and ways to Contact Me.  
  Blog RSS Feeds
Blog Excerpts
Full Entries
Design Entries Only
Atom Feed