Category Archives: Rants

Rants, Software

Is Google Buzz the new Blog?

Yeah, yeah, yeah. I know. You’ve heard it all week; Buzz, Buzz, Buzz. I’m very guilty of adding to the… well… Buzz. (Sorry. Bad pun.) and I’ve almost had enough myself.

I think nobody knows exactly what Google Buzz is right now and where it’s going to go, evolve into. I think most agree it has tremendous potential. However, a most provocative thought occured to me today; Could this be a Blog killer replacement?

The gist of my hypothetical argument is that Google Buzz could probably replace most blogs given the ability to take it out of Gmail, customize, widgetize and skin it a la iGoogle. The Google vehicle is already there in the form of the current Google profile page or embedded externally over the Buzz API. The vehicle for an standalone service is already there as Google owns Blogger. The quest for unified commenting could also have been solved by the advent of Buzz. Further more, Google’s proven efficiency at filtering SPAM in Gmail, it stands to reason that they’d do an excellent job at eliminating comment SPAM.

Please share your take with me – I’d really like to hear what you think.

For those of you who live under a stone actually live wholesome, meaningful lives Buzz is a new service launched by Google.

Think of Google Buzz as something like twitter with no character restrictions and with comments or Facebook without Farrmville and the other horrible wonderful stuff, like FriendFeed if you’re of a more adventerous inclination – or perhaps a Blog?

Currently I hate the (as of writing) lock-in of the service with Gmail, but I’ll keep that for future posts.

The service has improvement potential and, shall we say some rough edges?

Here’s a primer on what you should know about Google Buzz to get started.

To keep in the spirit of ‘the now’, I’ve embedded the original Google Buzz thread (as a grotesque kludge – do tell if you know of a better way) below.

UPDATE 2012: Below we have the answer to the question in the headline. It’s a resounding “no”. Buzz is scheduled to be killed and old content is not embedable anymore.

Standard
Rants

In Silicon Valley, life seems easy

So I finally went to Silicon Valley and visited Google at the Googleplex in Mountain View.

As I was in the area, I just had to stop by the legendary Xerox parc in Palo Alto and pay my dues. The home of the GUI and numerous other firsts. An obligatory geek homage trip.

Though not really considering myself a real Apple fanboi, I couldn’t pass up the opportunity aussie online casinos to pop by Infinite Loop 1 in Cupertino for a quick pose. On another note, it was also interesting to see the actual offices  of the guys and gals I’d been previously only been talking on the phone with from across the Atlantic. (A work thing. Nothing exiting. Don’t ask – I’d have to kill you. UPDATE: It was the launch of the iPhone in Europe.)

Funny story: I was at Infinite Loop 1 in the early evening, gift shop closed, no single car in the whole parking lot – and then I almost got run over by a silver Mercedes (with no license plates) speeding out of the underground parking. True story, I’ve got a witness. ;)

Standard
News, Rants, Social

Twitter muzzled?

UPDATE: Chris Anderson (@TEDchris) was right when he told me that this change would be for the better back in 2009. I accept now in hindsight that my initial reaction was perhaps mostly nostalgic about a future that couldn’t technically and socially exist. As the amount of my followers keept rising, it was becoming self-evident that the changes were needed. Nevertheless, I still feel some of the initial feeling of exciting serendipitous chaos that made Twitter very special back then is gone. I guess I’m still a bit nostalgic. What do you think?

Original post below:

This morning I read a blog post over at Read Write Web (RWW) that caught me by surprise. I recommend you read it too. It seems that twitter has removed what I consider an essential feature in their latest update.

I was so surprised that I wrote a comment in the emotional heat of the moment over at RWW and I decided to republish it here later on. My initial thoughts were as follows:

I’m quite appalled that twitter seems to me to be self confident – if not almost smirk – with removing a setting that potentially alters the mechanics of conversing and discovering on twitter on a fundamental level; In other words making twitter less like, well, twitter.

I find the idea of not listening to 2% of their user base quite grand. Did they do the maths? That’s not a tiny amount of people, is it? My guess is, that there are a lot of the early twitter adopters and evangelists in those 2% too.

Another bet of mine is that most of those 2% are most certainly not confused by the @ reply ‘system’. It’s inaccurate, not threaded and tracked – but who cares? It’s ‘the twitter way’ and some learned to live comfortably with it.

I’m also willing to bet that a much higher percentage was living under the illusion that they were getting every single public tweet from the people they were following and didn’t know that twitter was censoring and deciding what they could and could not see.

As to the topic of context, I personally find parts of the 2008 twitter blog post referred to in the comments over at RWW completely out of touch.

From the post:
“1) You should feel free to @reply people and not worry about it being out of context to some of your followers. In general, they won’t see it.”

To me, twitter is not instant messaging or email. To me, one of the most important aspects about twitter is enabling discovery, stumbling upon new interesting people, sparking curiosity, reading different perspectives. Why take all that away? I’m flabbergasted. Speechless.

Would it hurt too much to just leave the [promiscuous] setting as default OFF, but there to turn ON for the users who are comfortable with it?

Are there economical incentives involving either business plans or prohibitive cost-benefit ratios precluding it? If so, twitter should be up front and transparent about it.

Please bring ‘promiscuous’ back. I don’t want to have to subscribe to the RSS feed of every single user that I’m following in my reader of choice to get the complete unadulterated twitter stream (even from users that may have blocked me).

@blacktar

Standard
Rants, Social

Conversational Snake Oil?

There’s been some discussion about marketing and ‘the Conversation’ lately – or more perhaps more accurately an ‘ Anti-Conversation’ meme in the making.

Brian Oberkirch recently blogged about it too, which inspired me to share my take.

Dsc00281

Personally, I think Bill Hicks nailed it with regards to marketing in general. ;)

On another note, markets are conversations. That genie is out of the bottle.

Marketing depts, product depts, and hired marketing agency guns must clue up and take a good honest look at their position – then enter the Conversation in an honest, professional, and constructive way – if it makes sense. Not to be confused with marketing like a chat bot for serving customers, that’s a marketing tool that uses conversation, not conversational marketing.
No doubt that there are a lot of companies that will not benefit significantly from – heck, should not even consider – ‘conversational marketing’, if there ever was such a thing. I guess I just can’t think of many right now, but I’m sure there are others than say personnel mines and cluster bomb manufacturers that should perhaps hold back on the conversation sauce.

The bottom line seems to me that it has taken nine years for the Cluetrain Manifesto to grow into mainstream marketing. That may be considered a lifetime in Internet years, but then again, marketing as we know it was never particularly quick to adapt.

To me it’s like this with every new concept, disruptive change or meme? It’s just the hype cycle gone full circle. At the end of it, you’ll have clueless snake oil peddlers on every street corner desperately trying to cash in on a saturated market. In the end we just can’t stand it anymore. Tired and wary from the multichannel onslaught of buzzword abuse, we welcome any change – perhaps sometimes too rash and noncritical – creating a situation ripe for fleeting counter trends and anti-movements. Alas, the circle starts anew.

On another further note, could this emerging anti-conversation ‘movement’ be a conscious self-serving marketing ploy snowballing from a handful of self appointed social media marketing prophets trying to (re)position them from the quacks and to the gushing edge of Intarweb marketing?

You tell me.

Standard