Comments on: On the integration of Web 2.0 apps http://www.aquick.org/blog/2006/06/29/on-the-integration-of-web-20-apps/ entertaining hundreds of millions of eyeball atoms every day Sun, 12 Aug 2012 17:06:22 -0400 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: adam http://www.aquick.org/blog/2006/06/29/on-the-integration-of-web-20-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-724 adam Thu, 29 Jun 2006 17:44:25 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/2006/06/29/on-the-integration-of-web-20-apps/#comment-724 I think that's the wrong approach though - one of the great things about web2.0 is its distributed nature, and one of the great things about unix command line tools is that they generally follow the principles of "do one thing and do it well" and "if someone else does something better, then let them do it". Competition is good for the ecosystem, but so is lack of user confusion, and that's a delicate balance. If a web2.0 site is the best at what it does and it keeps improving its core functionality, it should be the repository of that function. Of course, this breaks down a bit when you're charging for a service, which also costs money to run. There's a delicate balance between contributing to the commons, which makes your service more valuable on the whole, and locking down your users to make them use your service, which probably looks like it increases retention. I think that’s the wrong approach though – one of the great things about web2.0 is its distributed nature, and one of the great things about unix command line tools is that they generally follow the principles of “do one thing and do it well” and “if someone else does something better, then let them do it”.

Competition is good for the ecosystem, but so is lack of user confusion, and that’s a delicate balance. If a web2.0 site is the best at what it does and it keeps improving its core functionality, it should be the repository of that function.

Of course, this breaks down a bit when you’re charging for a service, which also costs money to run. There’s a delicate balance between contributing to the commons, which makes your service more valuable on the whole, and locking down your users to make them use your service, which probably looks like it increases retention.

]]> By: Britt Blaser http://www.aquick.org/blog/2006/06/29/on-the-integration-of-web-20-apps/comment-page-1/#comment-723 Britt Blaser Thu, 29 Jun 2006 15:18:06 +0000 http://www.aquick.org/blog/2006/06/29/on-the-integration-of-web-20-apps/#comment-723 Thanks for this, Adam. So the question becomes whether or not the actual web 2.0 sites are that vital. Most of them take an obvious implementation and demonstrate a way to make it work, not too badly. Why not just incorporate the best capabilities of the best collaborative W2.0 apps into a master web service? You will recognize that as a rhetorical question. Thanks for this, Adam. So the question becomes whether or not the actual web 2.0 sites are that vital. Most of them take an obvious implementation and demonstrate a way to make it work, not too badly.

Why not just incorporate the best capabilities of the best collaborative W2.0 apps into a master web service?

You will recognize that as a rhetorical question.

]]>