i d e a g r o u p

Webapp overload?

There are two lists that recently have given me brainfreeze: Seth Godin's Web 2.0 ranking and Chris Mayaud's All Things Web 2.0 site.  Each provides a look into the world of new application-driven sites that in many cases do just one thing, albiet they usually do that one thing well. Seth's list has 937 sites. Chris' site has 2,211 listings (many are also on Seth's list).

One of the great qualities of the net is that it makes things easier.

Communication is easier. Translation is easier. Geolocation is easier. Finding lost friends is easier. Creating and distributing porn is easier. Creating an application, attracting users, and building a revenue-positive business is easier (don't confuse easier with easy).

Before, back when things were hard, it took dozens of developers, software architects, QA teams, user and interface designers to create an application that would be beta-tested to death--only to be tossed back and forth between sales guys saying SHIP IT and QA guys saying DON'T. Then, once that arguement is settled, the final product is documented, packaged and sent through the channel (distribution and retail) only to sit on shelves until some amount of marketing is done (the "pull") to make it move off shelves into our hands.

It is much easier now. Two guys in a dorm room can create a compelling web-based application using rapid developent tools like Ruby on Rails (among others), talk up that application on various blogs (like the ones I listed above), and start selling it.

Usually the Web 2.0 business model includes some mix of a free version and then a few levels of paid ones allowing the user to get value first, then pay later. This is of course in direct opposite to the models of old where you pay first and get value later (thanks to Guy Hoffman for reminding me of this simple but important shift).

Basecamp is a good example. It is a nice and simple project management tool that has a free version that lets you manage one project for free or unlimited projects for $149.00 a month. The application is very nice and was created by a small team at smart guys at 37 Signals (my understanding is that under ten people built and deployed the initial apps).

Which brings me to my point: if it is this easy to build and roll-out all these web-based apps, it stands to reason that we will quickly have a surplus of them.

So, what do we do about it? I don't know. Maybe you can suggest some ideas.

We can't go back. Maybe more is needed in the areas of webapp integration and implementation--helping companies use the apps they have more effecitvely. Maybe there are opportunities to help larger companies unravel closed internal systems and replace them with cheap and flexible open web ones.

Let me know what you think.

Energy Shifting with Gridpoint

I just read about this company, called Gridpoint on one of my favorite sites, "HUGG" (a take off on DIGG).

Gridpoint makes 2 products that basically "shift" energy usage using batteries and a PC all nicely packaged in one refrigerator-sized unit. So, the idea is that if you could store up cheap energy at night and then use that energy from your Gridpoint system during peak times instead of using from the grid.

Each system comes with their web-based management system that gives you a view into your consumption at different times of the day---and the energy you've saved with it.

It doesn't do much to help you conserve energy, but it does help you consume energy a bit smarter.

BACK IN BLACK(berry)

After 10 days with the Nokia E61, I have switched back to the Blackberry. Actually, I have switched forward to the Blackberry 8700C, which is a big step up from the 7500 series.

Here are the top 5 reasons I switched from the E61, which is in so many respects a great device.....

5. SLOW DIALING FROM CONTACT LIST: Calling from the "contacts" list is slow. It takes 2-4 seconds to get to the "smiths" when you type "sm" from a list of 1200 contacts (yes, I am a contacts-pack-rat and don't like deleting that random writer I met with one time in New York in 1999). In contrast, the BBerry loads and dials (or emails) from contacts instantly. No wait.

4. WIFI IS SO-SO: I was able to connect to a number of different encrypted and non-encrypted networks, but not always with ease. Managing WIFI connections (and causing applications to use specific connections) requires patience and a visit to a number of different places in settings / wifi, etc.... Not as seamless as it could be. But ok, this is a huge step to have it at all, and yes, the BBerry doesn't have it. My point here is that I bought the thing thinking that the WIFI would cause me to be switching between VOIP and GSM calls with ease and it is just not there yet.  The WIFI was a nice add, but not beneficial enough to keep me in the camp.

3. I MISS MY TRACKWHEEL: I love the trackwheel on the BBerry. It makes things so easy for one-handed use. The E61 has a center-mounted joystick thingy. It works well for web browsing and two-handed navigation through the device's OS, but I prefer the trackwheel.

2. VOLUME: The E61 just isn't loud enough for noisy environment calling. There were many times even in the car with the AC on that I couldn't get the volume up high enough.

1. SYNC ALL: The E61 does have the ability to run Blackberry's Connect software, which gives it some access to BES features--but not all. For example, it only sync's calendar entries over the air--not contacts, tasks, or notes like a true Blackberry device does. I am sure that this is some (Microsoft'ish) way to give their own devices a leg up in the marketplace, but to me, it is a cop-out. If you believe in your devices, make great devices and let them stand on their own--without cheating your software customers. But, I guess in my case it worked--the E61 is going on craigslist this weekend.