Wednesday, January 08, 2003

Screenweaver MX: Flash Desktop Applications Rubberduck, a Netherlands-based software group, just released Screenweaver MX, a powerful tool that enables developers to build full-featured desktop applications using Flash MX.  I had the benefit of participating in the beta and getting a view into the kinds of apps people are building.  The product enables developers to use native Windows functionality (like custom windows, windows events, native windows APIs, the task bar, and any custom code they can author into DLLs or COM objects) with rich, Flash-based user interfaces.  It also provides tools for packaging and installation of your Flash applications on the Windows desktop.   Any developer interested in building Internet-connected Windows-integrated desktop applications with rich, engaging user experiences should take a look at this powerful tool. 4:40:53 PM    comment []

Reactions to Dave Winer's First Essay of 2003 Dave Winer just posted his "First Essay of the Year" on scripting.com.  I always enjoy Dave's thinking and passion, so this is a good new year treat.  In his essay, he ponders how far we've come with the Two-Way Web through advances in XML-based content publishing and syndication, the growing role of weblogging for everyone, new approaches to digital sharing through mobile blogging, and questions about the role of commercial software and personal data. The question it really provoked for me, and one that has been lurking in my mind for the past few months, is whether weblogging as we know it will truly become a mainstream form of personal communications and sharing, rather than it's current perceived niche as form of personal or independent Internet journalism. Often, when smart people hear about weblogs/blogs/blogging they really ask -- isn't this just the web?  Isn't this just web publishing?  Indeed, it is, and as Dave responded to someone in his essay, it's the promise of the web but just made easier (and more sharable).  So what makes it different and how could it be transformed into a mainstream phenomenon? From my perspective, weblogs are revolutionary because: They make publishing to the web really simple --- they are very simple, consumer-level content management systems.  No HTML, no scripting, no knowledge of web servers, page layout, etc. They fulfill the promise of the semantic web (partially) by ensuring that your content is well structured (it's all XML!), and shareable (through RSS) in a standard way, and even well-described so their content can be harvested (RSS 2.0 in action will take is there) But they're also very constrained in terms of what consumers will ultimately want if they are to become mainstream forms of personal communications, equivailent to email and the written word.  For weblogs to become mainstream they need to: Break out of the calendar journal or narrative metaphor.  While the time-based approach to personal content makes sense often, it shouldn't be the only one.  Weblog software should harness the power of RSS 2.0 category metadata and namespace extensions to enable weblogs to store and render a much wider variety of content -- Dave gives some great examples of what some of these might be (medical histories, family trips, meeting minutes, etc.). Embrace richer forms of expression through graphics, audio and video.  While it's quite possible to do these things today by hyperlinking to media assets, it's not deeply integrated into the creation and publishing experience.  Content creation and communications tools need to support the MetaWeblog API, and these tools need to provide simple means for someone to share thoughts and expereinces with voice, or plug-in their webcam or camcorder or digital camera and transmit real life visual experiences into their personal spaces.  Aren't photosharing applications just bitmap-based weblog tools?  There's an invevitable collision here and in that weblogs can become much more valuable to consumers. Like Dave, I look forward to 2003 and what it brings for the two-way web. 2:52:13 PM    comment []

Broadband Must be a Two Way Street Defining Broadband in Only One Direction Wall Street Journal: After Internet's Big Bust, Broadband Shift Went On. Much of the new content being developed for broadband... [via Dan Gillmor's eJournal] Dan has a nice blurb here on the political-economic dynamics of broadband for consumers.  While I think that Dan is roughly correct in the view that (today) broadband suppliers are more interested downstream than upstream, I think it's for different reasons than the implied strategy of preventing alternative media and content sources originating from the home, or preventing digital theft. Most broadband suppliers offer an upstream bandwidth in the 256kbps to 512kbs range, with some much lower and others much higher.  It isn't much a matter of cost or technology, so why not have higher upstream connections?  It's mostly about lack of applications that require it.  While MP3 or DVD file swapping could consume a lot of it, there is yet to be a killer application that requires it. Embracing the idea of the two-way web starts taking us there, but I don't think this is so much about consumers becomming media/content providers as it is about consumers communicating and sharing life experiences in a much richer way.  There are counterveiling forces here, some backed by large industries (the software, consumer electronics and communications industries in particular) that want bigger two-way pipes.  Why?  The world is moving towards richer communications, where consumers share life experiences and communicate in an ad hoc way using audio and video, and use their new digital devices to capture, create and share those experiences. For broadband suppliers, it's ultimately about the bottom-line.  If bigger upstream pipes translates to metered or premium services that leverage two-way rich media and communications, they'll bite.  Or so I hope. 2:04:03 PM    comment []