One of my favorite software tools of all time, SugarSync, seems to be ready to shake things up again. I already wrote about this company and their killer backup and sync software. They have since released their iPhone and blackberry client but just recently released a new windows mobile client. They have also announced upcoming Symbian and (long awaited) Linux support too.
But now things are getting really interesting. Now it seems that they are getting ready to sync up with social networks. I haven't seen anything from SugarSync yet, but I can presume that once your data is synced with SugarSync, the new features will allow you to easily (or maybe even automatically) send your data to facebook, myspace, youtube, and the like. Thus, all of your "stuff" can be streamed out all over the internet even though its only uploaded once. It seems that they're pitching this for media publishers who upload their crap to a dozen different websites every time they make a small change. But it would be nice for consumers too.
Additionally, on their second, somewhat hidden website, they have a modified logo with the image of a TV being synced. It seems that Sugarsync has plans to invade the living room. I'm not sure how this would work, but I would bet its either an XBox Live application, or something similar to the NetFlix appliance. Its a great idea. You could go to your friends house, turn on his XBox and listen to all the music thats sitting on your home computer... even if your computer is turned off.
Its clear that SugarSync wants to be on anything with a display to broaden its user-base to the max. I'm all for it. The software is easy to use, works great, and I can't wait to see what they have got next. SugarSync is the begining of true cloud computing.
Wednesday, December 17, 2008
Saturday, December 13, 2008
Has Obama infected the tech-world?
It seemed like just a couple of months ago, the only thing the tech-world was interested in was adding new facebook gadgets and finding another way to make an old application "social" (See flock, wesabe, mint, and probably hundreds more). But in the last few months I've seen some change in the blogosphere and I'm wondering if its here to stay. Some big players (see Lessig) are starting to pay attention to the "stuff that matters." Even Obama's site change.gov, with its web 2.0 and social feel, bridges the do-goodery world with the tech one.
I can't tell if this is the beginning of a trend or just a handful of people caught up with Obamaitis. I hope its the former, but for it to have any impact and produce anything impressive, it has got to keep its pace up for at least six months.
I'm gonna start looking out for this more now.
I can't tell if this is the beginning of a trend or just a handful of people caught up with Obamaitis. I hope its the former, but for it to have any impact and produce anything impressive, it has got to keep its pace up for at least six months.
I'm gonna start looking out for this more now.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Copyright Violations as bad as Child Pornography?
I found this legal factoid in a washington post article a bit surprising.... "Web hosting providers are generally not liable for illegal activity carried out on their networks, except in cases involving copyright violations and child pornography." Hmmm... why are copyright violations being held to the same standard as child pornography? I was about to get myself into a big huff believing that recording and movie industry lobbyists snuck this in without anyone realizing.
But then I did a bit of research and realized that the quote is actually innacurate. Web hosting providers can get themselves into legal trouble for a variety of reasons other than copyright violations and child pornography including: trademark violations, inciting or abating terrorism, and defamation (with limits). Additionally, ISPs are almost never liable unless they are aware of the activity on their network. So if the ISP is ignorant of the activity, then they're probably safe.
But then I did a bit of research and realized that the quote is actually innacurate. Web hosting providers can get themselves into legal trouble for a variety of reasons other than copyright violations and child pornography including: trademark violations, inciting or abating terrorism, and defamation (with limits). Additionally, ISPs are almost never liable unless they are aware of the activity on their network. So if the ISP is ignorant of the activity, then they're probably safe.
Thursday, April 3, 2008
Future of the Web?
When the internet was first invented in the 70s it was used to connect military personal and emergency workers in a time of crisis. It was purely utilitarian: used to convey facts and events from one point to another.
However as time went on, and researches in academia recognized the internet's utility, they started using it to share research between colleagues. Initially it was largely used to send data from one point to another but later became a place where ideas could be shared.
In the mid to late 80s the internet evolved further. No longer was it limited to well funded researchers in big universities. Any technologically apt person with a couple hundred dollars could get on the internet and talk to users across the world. This is where the social web really began: the old BBSs' and newsgroups of the early internet. Instead of communicating purely in ideas, jokes and stories were being told. People became "friends" online. This concept continued throughout the 90s. AOL helped bring chartrooms to the masses and all of a sudden millions of people were meeting online.
However for years the internet was really limited to the computer literate. Many didn't understand why or how to use computers. The internet was mostly a domain for nerds and businesses who knew how to gain an edge. It took another ten years, a whole generation, for everyone to catch on. In the late nineties we saw the beginning of the information revolution. Even if many did not know how to use the internet, nearly everyone realized its utility.
Now ten years later so much is happening its harder to pin down exactly where we are or where we're going. Nearly all of the major websites today have some social component to them. Most grandparents know how to get on the internet to read and write email. Anyone living on one side of the world can get immediate and personal access to others living on the other side.
The notion of the internet cloud has emerged. Instead of a clear-cut way to send information from one point to another, we have something as complex and nuanced as our own society. We submit information which can be read, commented, tagged, or even altered by anyone, but mostly by our own friends and connections. Instead of interacting with anonymous people across the world we have now started interacting with our own friends over the inernet.
I have a couple of predictions. As more and more people start jumping on the web and interact socially on it, we'll start to see the technology content and "nerd" sites lose market share to more common interests sites. A big milestone will be when Huffington Post beats TechCrunch as the #1 blog on the internet. Keep updated here.
However the web will go much further than blogs and social networks. All sorts of new technology is bringing locality onto the web. Instead of connecting people across the world, I think we'll start seeing the web connect people next door. Craigslist is a good example but I think we'll start seeing much more sophisticated. You can already peer into other people's houses with amazing detail. Its only a matter of time before all of your neighbors are indexed, tagged, and shared.
I'm not quite sure what the implications for the new local internet will be. Obviously there are privacy issues. There are plenty of avenues for spammers and stalkers alike to take advantage of the technology. But I think there is much good that come out of it too. It will connect and organize local communities. It will bring these communities closer together and make them feel more like home.
Honestly I'm pretty excited about whats coming out on the internet. The dot-com bubble didn't burst, it just deflated for a couple years. But now its back, albeit a bit less obnoxious and we're going to see loads of new changes.
However as time went on, and researches in academia recognized the internet's utility, they started using it to share research between colleagues. Initially it was largely used to send data from one point to another but later became a place where ideas could be shared.
In the mid to late 80s the internet evolved further. No longer was it limited to well funded researchers in big universities. Any technologically apt person with a couple hundred dollars could get on the internet and talk to users across the world. This is where the social web really began: the old BBSs' and newsgroups of the early internet. Instead of communicating purely in ideas, jokes and stories were being told. People became "friends" online. This concept continued throughout the 90s. AOL helped bring chartrooms to the masses and all of a sudden millions of people were meeting online.
However for years the internet was really limited to the computer literate. Many didn't understand why or how to use computers. The internet was mostly a domain for nerds and businesses who knew how to gain an edge. It took another ten years, a whole generation, for everyone to catch on. In the late nineties we saw the beginning of the information revolution. Even if many did not know how to use the internet, nearly everyone realized its utility.
Now ten years later so much is happening its harder to pin down exactly where we are or where we're going. Nearly all of the major websites today have some social component to them. Most grandparents know how to get on the internet to read and write email. Anyone living on one side of the world can get immediate and personal access to others living on the other side.
The notion of the internet cloud has emerged. Instead of a clear-cut way to send information from one point to another, we have something as complex and nuanced as our own society. We submit information which can be read, commented, tagged, or even altered by anyone, but mostly by our own friends and connections. Instead of interacting with anonymous people across the world we have now started interacting with our own friends over the inernet.
I have a couple of predictions. As more and more people start jumping on the web and interact socially on it, we'll start to see the technology content and "nerd" sites lose market share to more common interests sites. A big milestone will be when Huffington Post beats TechCrunch as the #1 blog on the internet. Keep updated here.
However the web will go much further than blogs and social networks. All sorts of new technology is bringing locality onto the web. Instead of connecting people across the world, I think we'll start seeing the web connect people next door. Craigslist is a good example but I think we'll start seeing much more sophisticated. You can already peer into other people's houses with amazing detail. Its only a matter of time before all of your neighbors are indexed, tagged, and shared.
I'm not quite sure what the implications for the new local internet will be. Obviously there are privacy issues. There are plenty of avenues for spammers and stalkers alike to take advantage of the technology. But I think there is much good that come out of it too. It will connect and organize local communities. It will bring these communities closer together and make them feel more like home.
Honestly I'm pretty excited about whats coming out on the internet. The dot-com bubble didn't burst, it just deflated for a couple years. But now its back, albeit a bit less obnoxious and we're going to see loads of new changes.
Monday, March 31, 2008
The Backup Problem Is Solved
Like just about everyone else I hate doing backups. My main computer is a laptop so I use external hard-drives to backup everything. Jesus are external hard-drives finicky! I've gone through three broken drives in two years. It sucks up my time and my money.
Well no more. I've found SugarSync.
SugarSync is honestly one of the coolest Web-2.0 technologies I've seen yet. It solves the backup problem with as few headaches as possible. There is no need to buy extra drives, DVD-RWs, or backup appliances. Everything is stored on the internet.
One downside is that SugarSync is kinda pricy. It charges a yearly subscription fee which costs about the same price as buying a hard drive every year. However I bet the price will come down and besides, there are loads of extra perks.
Because everything is stored on the internet you can access your documents from anywhere. It also uses Amazon's redundant backup system so there is zero chance you'll lose any data. It can also sync data from multiple computers/laptops/phones. It runs quietly in the background and and uses less system resources than winamp. But best of all, its brain-dead easy while being extremely powerful.
I'm normally a skeptic when it comes to new technology, however take my word for it... this is good, real good. Buy the product, or if you can, some stock in the company.
Well no more. I've found SugarSync.
SugarSync is honestly one of the coolest Web-2.0 technologies I've seen yet. It solves the backup problem with as few headaches as possible. There is no need to buy extra drives, DVD-RWs, or backup appliances. Everything is stored on the internet.
One downside is that SugarSync is kinda pricy. It charges a yearly subscription fee which costs about the same price as buying a hard drive every year. However I bet the price will come down and besides, there are loads of extra perks.
Because everything is stored on the internet you can access your documents from anywhere. It also uses Amazon's redundant backup system so there is zero chance you'll lose any data. It can also sync data from multiple computers/laptops/phones. It runs quietly in the background and and uses less system resources than winamp. But best of all, its brain-dead easy while being extremely powerful.
I'm normally a skeptic when it comes to new technology, however take my word for it... this is good, real good. Buy the product, or if you can, some stock in the company.
Sunday, July 29, 2007
Lockheed: Who are you working for?
I have always been amused with Lockheed's corporate slogan: "We never forget who we're working for". Who the hell are they working for? My first guess would be their shareholders. The companies stock price is prominently displayed on the front page of their corporate web site. They are a for-profit company so they must eventually answer to their shareholders.
But we all know thats not the image that Lockheed wants to project. They want an altruistic image. They want to show us lay-people that they aren't a giant defense contractor which spends millions of dollars a year to buy our government. They want us to think that they are really here to help us out.
But their slogan doesn't make clear who they are "working for". Are they working for the soldiers? the American people? the pentagon? the president? This is just smoke-and-mirrors marketing at its best.
On the Lockheed website the slogan is displayed underneath their logo, but it isn't mentioned anywhere else. Their "Vision and Value" statement seems to put their customer (the pentagon) above all else.
I don't have a problem with companies which are motivated by their customer satisfaction, stock price, or plain old greed. If they want to serve the interests of the pentagon over the will of the American people then thats a worthy purpose, and they should explain it. However I do have a problem with idiotic slogans which are only intended to obfuscate the companies real motivation.
Update: I'm not the only one who has a problem with this slogan.
Monday, July 23, 2007
WebOS Farce
I've been playing around with a handful of WebOS's as of late. In the last six months they have sprung up like hot cakes. These web-gadgets are wonderfully cool and wonderfully useless. The value of having an internet desktop on top of your own desktop seems slight. I could only see it being useful for someone paranoid about privacy or who jumps around between dozens of computers. But even then, there are better tools for doing either job. And if you're paranoid about privacy you're hardly going to put all of your trust in some quirky WebOS company. Especially given their history.
I also don't understand why nearly all WebOS designers decide to implement their "OS" in their own proprietary AJAX/flash system. Every WebOS has to write their own text editor, calculator, web browser, file management system, etc. It seems very inefficient to rewrite all of those programs. Not to mention that the quality of the apps are much much worse then their desktop counterparts.
Instead of writing a whole new operating system with a closed set of apps, it makes much more sense to provide a web-interface to a real computer or virtual machine. The reason why Windows, Mac, and Linux are popular is because its easy to write software for them. If any WebOS ever takes off they are going to have to be able to run lots of software.
One implementation may be a WebOS sever which simply finds a user's virtual machine image and loads it up. It then launches a browser plugin like VNC or remote desktop. You then get access to a whole computer, not some mushy half-ass web-app.
All of these pieces already exist. All you need to do is hook them up. You could use the open source implementation of remote desktop, the open source virtual machine software, and then either find or write some kind of user and security management front-end. I'm kinda amazed no one has done it yet and called it a WebOS.
I also don't understand why nearly all WebOS designers decide to implement their "OS" in their own proprietary AJAX/flash system. Every WebOS has to write their own text editor, calculator, web browser, file management system, etc. It seems very inefficient to rewrite all of those programs. Not to mention that the quality of the apps are much much worse then their desktop counterparts.
Instead of writing a whole new operating system with a closed set of apps, it makes much more sense to provide a web-interface to a real computer or virtual machine. The reason why Windows, Mac, and Linux are popular is because its easy to write software for them. If any WebOS ever takes off they are going to have to be able to run lots of software.
One implementation may be a WebOS sever which simply finds a user's virtual machine image and loads it up. It then launches a browser plugin like VNC or remote desktop. You then get access to a whole computer, not some mushy half-ass web-app.
All of these pieces already exist. All you need to do is hook them up. You could use the open source implementation of remote desktop, the open source virtual machine software, and then either find or write some kind of user and security management front-end. I'm kinda amazed no one has done it yet and called it a WebOS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)