MappingTheWeb //

This evening, Digg launched an all new interface. The new design is even more clear and intuitive than before. Some of the changes include:

• The ability to view both news and videos on a single page. This is due to feedback received indicating a high interest in videos.
• Tweaks to the page and story summary layouts.
• Streamlined navigation.
• Increased customization options.
• Simple one-click bury with no explanation needed.

All in all, small cosmetics changes such as added icons, new colour palettes, and shuffled page elements add to the overall clean experience. The service description has moved from the right sidebar to the main navigation column. This provides more concise site messaging for new visitors, as well as a clear call-to-action for potential new users (i.e. Join now). As a side note, Digg continues to minimize page views by maximizing AJAX functionality.

From a more broad prespective, I think Digg is trying to bring the service mainstream. The dead simple navigation and clear messaging indicate a marketing push to regular folk. That being said, it also appears as though Digg is making a big push toward monetization. A very large, prominent inline rectangle ad is now visible on the home page. Article pages are also riddled with two ads - both a leaderboard and an inline rectangle ad. It will be interested to see how the Digg community reacts to such changes.

From an initial glance, I really like the new changes. Digg has done a really good job of simplifying the experience, yet adding functionality. Such a counterintuitive feat can only be the result of brilliance. Kudos to the Digg team.

I’ve seen my fair share of useless web 2.0 start-ups lately. Give me something I can actually use. Couchville is that something. It is very rare and refreshing when a new service comes along and surprises with a stunning experience.

I had no expectations from a service that offers TV listings. After all, TV is so old school, right? Wrong. Couchville has done an excellent job of incorporating new-web technology with traditional media to create a wonderful experience. Couchville quietly launched in February 2007. Only recently has it come to my attention. Simply put, Couchville offers dead simple TV listings - and I mean that.

When you hit the site, you are prompted to enter postal code (or zip code) and your satellite/cable provider to create a personalized grid.

The viewing experience is phenomenal. An uncluttered, intuitive interface displays only the necessary functionality without any useless features. The AJAX viewing grid can smoothly be dragged to a desired viewing period without the need for a page refresh. Your arrow keys can also be used to navigate through channels. An explicit red time bar clearly indicates current TV listings in your area. Surprisingly, only a few subtle text ads appear on the page.

Click here for a full screenshot: Couchville screenshot.

Here are some of the other useful features offered:

• Users can hide channels they don’t want to see, creating a customized viewing experience.
• An AJAX calendar function allows you to quickly and easily viewing listings for other days or months. 
• Users can add shows to their favourites for easy tracking.
• A buzz chart tracks what is hot from the previous week.
• The site provides background info and descriptions for each show, as well as a permanent link for easy access.
• The search function autocompletes your query, requiring you to only type a few letters.
• A drop-down menu quickly allows you to jump to any channel.

I was actually surprised at how fast the site operated as well. Kudos to the Couchville team. I guess I just can’t say enough good things about the service. I would highly recommend that anyone who checks TV listings check out Couchville. You will not be disappointed.

Couchville has succeeded at doing ONE thing very well - that being TV listings, obviously. Their strategic focus must be applauded. Too many companies have been caught trying to be everything to everyone. These companies got killed.

The typical marketing plan of a clueless, old-school Internet company looking to kick it up a notch with some new-school, trendy social marketing strategies. 

Sound familiar? Countless Internet companies have become brain-washed. They are convinced that these new technologies are critical to their future success. In some cases, they may be right. But for the most part, they lack fit. Successful marketing techniques have to be strategized on an individual basis. What works for one start-up may not work for another. In other words, RSS may work for company A, while widgets may be best suited for company B.

My consulting background has really driven this point home. I’ve heard things like: “Our website NEEDS tagging” or “Let’s throw in some AJAX”. My subsequent steps are as follows:

1. I laugh (well, not aloud).
2. I describe the technology in detail and outline the benefits.
3. In most cases, I dismiss the use of the given technology.

My basis is simple: the ‘trendy’ technology MUST further the user experience and/or provide a greater marketing punch. The simple implementation of a technology for the sake of an implementation is pointless. Simply put, the questions that a company needs to ask itself are as follows:

• Will this technology create a more enjoyable user experience?
• Can we reach more potential users if we implement this technology?
• Do we simply find comfort and security in new, buzzword-compliant marketing techniques?

All jokes aside, this is a serious problem. More and more, we are seeing the use of these technologies in places they shouldn’t be. They are a waste of resources and confuse the offering.

Simplicity is key.

If traditional Internet marketing strategies (such as e-mail marketing or SEO) will provide the greatest ROI, then forget about RSS, podcasting, and the rest of their buzzword siblings. With all due respect, I am a huge advocate of all the technologies mentioned. Their place on the Internet cannot be argued, but they must be used in the proper context. 

PS. Another correct answer to the initial question would have been: the typical business plan of a Silicon Valley start-up. Too many start-ups are looking to jump on the web 2.0 buzzword bandwagon - VCs just don’t buy it anymore, literally.

Web 2.0 is an echo-chamber - let’s face it. Many deny the fact, but it’s true. Ask anyone on the street about RSS, widgets, APIs, or wikis and you’ll get a blank face. Chances are they’ll think you’re speaking another language. Even fairly tech savvy Internet users frown upon such terms and phrases. As much as we’d like to think web 2.0 is mainstream, it isn’t.

Those who live in this echo-chamber glorify the trends and technologies, as their value and potential is recognizable. This bleeding-edge Internet group wants the world to learn about these technologies, but the fact of the matter is that they are very daunting and intimidating to the average user. In other words, web 2.0 needs to be humanized before it can ever be adopted by the mainstream.

Who is leading the pack when it comes to humanizing web 2.0? Facebook. Here is proof: ask any Facebook user if they know what RSS is or if they’ve ever used it? Chances are they have no idea what it is and they’ll admit to never using it. Little do they know, the Facebook ‘News Feed’ is essentially a rebranded RSS reader. Instead of pulling blog posts and news articles, the reader aggregates updates from your friends’ profiles.

This brings me to the most important point of all: Facebook is educating the masses about web 2.0 without them even knowing. In other words, Facebook IS bringing web 2.0 mainstream.

How is Facebook accomplishing such an improbable feat? By rebranding the terms and phrases that seem so daunting and sophisticated. This facilitates the education process and reduces the learning curve, making it easier for regular folk to adopt these technologies.

The term “social network” is synonymous with web 2.0. Though the nature of the term may be rather self-explanatory, people understand it. Sites such as MySpace, hi5, and Friendster have helped to provide clarity around its meaning. This education process is exactly what is happening at Facebook as we speak.

Let’s explore some of the web 2.0 technologies that Facebook has rebranded as internal features:

Wikis - By definition, a wiki is a collaborative space that can be edited by anyone with access to the site. This notion of participation and cooperation creates a more productive, usable information portal for all affiliated members.

Facebook has rebranded this concept as ‘Groups’. Within a given group, you are able to start a conversation (with a message), add photos, and provide simple commentary. Furthermore, administrators and officers have added control and functionality.

Blogs - When a user writes a ‘Note’ on Facebook, they are expressing their thoughts or opinions in a given manner. A collection of these notes, in reverse chronological order, can be classified as a ‘weblog’ or blog.

The offline concept of a diary has been around for centuries. It doesn’t take a huge leap of faith to consider a jump into the online world.

User-Generated Content (UGC) - Once again, the term may seem rather self-explanatory, but it does need some clarification. UGC is content created by the user - it is not production quality. Examples include photos, videos, and audio clips.

Not only does Facebook upload an astonishing amount of photos each day, but they also provide a simple, yet powerful video experience. Simply put, users are constantly interacting with user-generated content. They just don’t know it.  

API - An API is an Application Programming Interface. In other words, it is a way to let others integrate with your service by tapping into your data. This is what Facebook has done with their new ‘F8 Platform’. They’re allowing others the ability to tap into Facebook’s database and create applications which can then be added to the system and adopted by users.

Micro-blogging - This new phenomenon is essentially a mini-form of blogging. Recently made popular by companies such as Twitter and Tumblr, micro-blogging is a way to provide a short message (usually less than 200 characters) about your life, mood, or current state via the web, e-mail, text, or IM. To meet demand in this area, Facebook launched ‘Status Updates’, which is simply another way of labelling micro-blogging.

Widgets - Though the comparison may be a bit rough, it is still worth acknowledging. A widget is an embedded device that provides some level of value to the publisher. This is somewhat akin to what Facebook has done with their ‘F8 Platform’, and more notably ‘Applications’. Once a user adds a given ‘Application’, it appears on their profile page, where other users can see it and interact with it (or even add it themselves).

RSS - The concept of the ‘News Feed’ acting as an RSS reader was outlined above. Having said that, Facebook has started to integrate actual RSS protocol within the site as well. Anyone now has the ability to subscribe (via RSS) to another user’s ‘Notes’, in many cases. I’m sure RSS is being used in other places within the site, but I have just failed to notice them. In any case, I expect the adoption of RSS within the Facebook community to be slow, but steady.

On top of all these obvious examples, Facebook also makes extensive use of AJAX (Asynchronous JavaScript and XML) throughout the site. This creates a more intuitive, enjoyable user experience.

I could probably go on and on and outline further examples, but I think we can all get a grasp of the situation that is unfolding. What can we learn from all this? Facebook is a rebranding machine. The ability to provide such advanced technologies in a simple manner is truly remarkable. The day that excites me the most is the day that people realize that they understand what all these web 2.0 technologies are. That will be the day that web 2.0 goes mainstream - and I have a funny feeling that that day is coming sooner than we imagine.

The coming of the new-web brought with it a bucket of buzz words and terms. Among them: podcast, RSS, wikis, VOIP, blog, widgets, and of course, AJAX. Some are relevant, while others are simply fads with no long-term potential. AJAX, for one, has been a term buzzing around the development community. The combination of asynchronous JavaScript and XML forms a powerful, interactive experience by increasing usability and saving time.

Don’t get me wrong… I am not an expert in the area. Programming is definitely not my schtick. But from a non-techie perspective, I see a definite problem. A large majority of websites nowadays generate revenues via advertising. In other words, they are looking to maximize their number of page views. In the case of AJAX, a page load is not needed to perform a given action or task. Do you see what is missing here?

Why would Internet Company A want to use AJAX if it is going to decrease page views, thus decreasing revenues? It doesn’t make sense. So Internet Company A may want to stay away from this web development technique. This may mean that the user is unable to experience the site at its utmost potential.

Furthermore, another problem often overlooked is around browsing and navigation. If I alter, edit, or modify an AJAX-driven page, then hit the “Back” button on my browser, I jump back to a previous page - not my previous edit or change. This causes some anxiety among users. One could also argue that issues regarding URLs may pose problems as well.

Nonetheless, the technique does have its positive as mentioned above. The decrease in bandwidth utilization, increased interactivity, and more fulfilling user experience create an environment that is perfect for some web applications.

I guess what I am saying is that every company should assess whether or not AJAX is a good fit with their experience before deciding to implement it. 

Do you think AJAX has long term sustainability or is it simply a fad?