Software Development should be as simple as possible. In fact, it should be designed and developed under the assumption it is disposable!
|
|
Google Buzz: When worlds collide |
 |
 |
|
Written by Brian Houser
|
|
Monday, 22 February 2010 10:40 |
|
The most important difference between Twitter and Facebook is the scope of communication. On Twitter, I follow people because they have a history of saying interesting things. And since I have a bunch of followers on Twitter that I have no idea who they are, my own posts tend to be aimed at a general audience. On the other hand, all my Facebook friends are people that I've met face-to-face, and I plan to keep it that way. I've added them to my network because of the chance they might say something interesting and there's a better than average chance they will simply because what they say is potentially relevant to me. Sure, Facebook profiles and posts can be public, too, but it's not set up with public consumption in mind, and the people I know who use it that way are far and few between. With Google Buzz, these worlds collide. Like Facebook, it supports both public and private/grouped conversations. Like Twitter, it provides ways to publicly follow people without them making you their "friend". For Buzz to be successful, it will have to make this manageable. Currently, it's very much like taking the streams from my Facebook friends and the people I follow on Twitter and mashing them together. The more important stuff from my friends and family gets lost in the shuffle. To make this work, Buzz will have to attach some prioritization to messages depending on whether they originated from someone in one of my contact groups (ideally, it would provide a way to prioritize each person individually as well). It's going to be real user interface challenge to combine the simplicity of Twitter with the focused nature of Facebook. |
|
|
A friendlier take on Google's Buzz strategy |
|
|
|
Written by Brian Houser
|
|
Wednesday, 17 February 2010 15:44 |
|
In a previous post I speculated how Google's surprise release of Buzz was the first act in a war against Facebook. I and most of the internet pundits jumped to the capitalistic conclusion that it's always about competition. But that's not really how Google typically operates. Of course the exception is their ad business and the search engine--which is a key component of that ad business. That's their core business and revenue stream and with that, they have to compete. For everything else, though, they are not interested in domination as much as they are in obtaining influence. As with most of Google's products, Buzz is an open platform. It's there to be studied, enhanced, and hooked into by anyone. It's built as a framework for trying out cool ideas in the social networking space. Google couldn't just sit by any longer while services like Facebook and Twitter lead the way and make the rules. Facebook and Google both have a vision of finding ways to make the internet a more organized and relevant place for users. Buzz is Google's way of making sure it helps define how that works. Google will continue to enhance Buzz not to drive the other sites away but to raise the bar for all of them. Already, Buzz has set a few new expectations for social networking: users' posts should be able to flow into and out of various sites, updating should be in real-time, and it should be able to share the contacts and groups already existing in users' email programs. |
|
Buzz is Google's first shot across the bow of Facebook |
|
|
|
Written by Brian Houser
|
|
Monday, 15 February 2010 15:57 |
|
Disclaimer: I don't have any inside information; this is all just speculation on my part as an IT consultant and technology enthusiast. With the sudden release of Buzz, Google has fired the first shot in the great social networking war. In the end, it will be Buzz vs. Facebook. Google knew that it had to grab a huge user base right out of the gate to have a chance. It did this by tying Buzz to Gmail. Buzz's biggest problem is that most people who are interested in social networks already have them established. But Google is hoping to get a lot of potential newcomers interested by sucking in Gmail users who haven't gotten around to using Facebook and Twitter. That's the first move--get something out there to catch anyone still looking for a social networking site. |
|
Last Updated on Monday, 15 February 2010 17:07 |
|
|
Is the Wave/Buzz duality a sign Google has gotten too big? |
|
|
|
Written by Brian Houser
|
|
Monday, 15 February 2010 13:14 |
|
 Google surprised most of us this week with their announcement of Buzz, their attempt to get into the social networking space. There's a lot of overlap in functionality and purpose between Buzz and Wave and I can't help but wonder if Google has a long-term strategy that includes both of these products or if they've reached a size where their departments can no longer coordinate effectively. When Microsoft started releasing a lot of overlapping products and platforms a few years ago I knew they had reached that point of stagnation.
However, the stunning speed at which Google implemented changes in response to users' security concerns proves they are still quite nimble at least at the product level. Contrast their turnaround within hours to the days and weeks it took Facebook to even respond to their security issues. Perhaps Google has planned different paths for Buzz and Wave, but it seems the ideal solution would be one that combined both into a single product. Buzz would be a real standout if it included Wave's plug-in framework, real-time IM-like updating, and history playback. We don't need one more tool; we need a single platform that does it all. One of the problems with Wave is that it's an island unto itself rather than being part of the email inbox--it's one more place to check. Google noticed that problem and made Buzz a part of the email framework. I'd like to think that Google knows what it's doing. My guess is that it's been thinking along these lines but knew Wave is still not ready for prime time and just couldn't wait any longer to enter the social networking space. I expect to see a combining of Buzz and Wave before long. |
|
Last Updated on Monday, 15 February 2010 17:13 |
|
Understanding Git for SourceSafe users |
|
|
|
Written by Brian Houser
|
|
Monday, 24 August 2009 08:13 |
|
I've been a user of Microsoft Visual SourceSafe for a long time. Back in the days of VB5 and 6 it was the obvious choice and continued to be for the first few releases of Visual Studio .NET as well. In the typical environment at the time, it was easy to set up and had pretty good integration with the IDE. I recently started a new project with a new client and was faced with establishing an adequate development environment. We have a two-member development team and the client doesn't currently have a place for us to sit onsite. We'll be using Visual Studio 2005 and 2008 for writing web applications, SSIS packages, and database changes. Visual SourceSafe is no longer an obvious choice. First of all, Microsoft seems to want everyone to use Team System and forget that SourceSafe exists--I couldn't even find the SourceSafe setup on the Visual Studio install DVD and had to download it from the MSDN site. Team System is overkill for a two developer team (in my opinion it's probably too much for any team smaller than ten members) and would be more trouble than it's worth to set up in our environment, not to mention the cost. |
|
Last Updated on Thursday, 10 September 2009 10:38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page 1 of 4 |
