I was glad to see indications that Microsoft is going to increase competition with Flickr. I have a Flickr account and a Windows Live Space and welcome competition.
Here's how these services compare to me as a hobbyist.
This is free. Can't beat that. But I would not mind paying for some Pro account if it delivers the right features.
I pay for a pro account but the price feels right for unlimited uploads and sets.
500 pictures per 30 days is too few especially when starting the account and using it to store/back up all pictures.
Of course unlimited uploads are good. I'm willing to pay for it!
I want to upload the original file. Regardless of the file type or size. No jpg optimization or other hocus spocus please.
I can upload the original file of whatever picture I have and trust Flickr not to modify it in a way that would impact quality.
My friends can download entire albums.
Can't download an entire set and I don't want to have trust this 3rd party tools developed by people I don't know.
Windows Live Photogallery is a good start. Add better, faster, upload AND download and synchronization features and I'm happy.
Which tools??? Somebody at Yahoo needs to realize that its OK for a Web 2.0 company to build a rich/fat client application. We won't make fun of you for this!
It's difficult to find out what the terms of service are exactly. Which file sizes are supported? Can I get a pro account, etc...
All clear to me.
So please heat up the competition. Get the fundamentals right (file size, upload limit) and build some awesome client tools to start with. After that, invest in those nice to have Web 2.0, social web features (post to facebook...). Oh, and move fast!
If Windows Live spaces fixes some of the stuff I mention, I'll probably switch. Provided I have a tool that extracts my sets from Flickr and loads them into spaces albums. I know, I'm needy!
Leopard is the New Vista, and It's Pissing Me Off - Columns by PC Magazine
I enjoyed reading this blog post. I'm amused by people going all Jerry Seinfeld over technology.
There is one reason however why one should never compare Windows to MacOS like this: MacOS runs on closed hardware. Any technical person and any person with some common sense would agree that it's infinitely more difficult to run your software without glitches on an infinite number of hardware configurations compared to running it on just a small set of configs.
Here's some more information:
- at launch 1.4 million devices were supported, whilst today that figure has grown to 2.2 million devices
- at launch 23,000 hardware products were supported and this has now reached 41,000; whilst over 900 hardware partners are certifying thousands of components.
- according to Download.com, 98 out of the top 100 best selling Windows applications are all compatible. To date, over 2,000 applications have passed Vista compatibility tests.
My point? Leopard will never be the new Windows. It will always be the OS that runs well (at least in most cases) on a handful of configurations with a limited set of applications to run. Still, it proves to be a good model for Apple and they get and deserve also praise for that from some who are happy to live with these constraints. And that's fine by me.
PS: I'm getting Leopard myself next week whilst in the US. It's a Euro vs. Dollar thing.
Google Plans Service to Store Users' Data - WSJ.com
Compare this from the article announcing Google's plans:
The service could let users access their files via the Internet from different computers and mobile devices when they sign on with a password, and share them online with friends.
With this from the Windows Live Skydrive Site:
Now, in case your are interested in storing data online and sharing data, no need to wait. You can get started with SkyDrive today.
Feel free to comment :-) I'm sure you can find some examples you believe Skydrive might be copying from.
(Image from WSJ article)
Nicolas Carr is right about Google's innovation being overhyped. Just like my employer (Microsoft), they innovate, acquire and embrace.
Inbox 2.0: Yahoo and Google to Turn E-Mail Into a Social Network - Bits - Technology - New York Times Blog
Interesting article but the author fails to mention Microsoft as being a big (if not the biggest) player in this game. This happens only too often in my opinion.
I understand many people don't consider Microsoft to be 'Web 2.0'. While quite a few of Microsoft's products might not be (yet), some of them definately are!
What Yahoo and Google are trying to do is nothing more than what Microsoft has been developing for a long time already with Mail, Live Spaces, and Messenger. You have a user's profile and create services that pull in more of that user's data.
Millions of people have a Hotmail, MSN or Windows Live ID. They use this mostly for email or chatting over Live Messenger. The interesting bit about Live messenger is that it holds the Social Graph. And a nice graph too as contacts are categorized (colleagues, frieds, family, other). This categorization potentially allows for a much richer social network than what we see today. Think of Facebook and Linked in all in one.
Live Spaces is the place where users add their data and create their public facing internet presence. It has more of the components than most of the big social networks players:
- pictures (increasing competition)
Granted, some of these components trail some of the competition's products but in some areas Microsoft is leading too.
Interestingly, Microsoft isn't doing bad either. The number of Live ID's is amazing as is the number of Live Spaces. And with increased investments in this space like on the social newsfeed and the picture sharing functionality, Microsoft will be a player Google, Yahoo and others will need to consider regardless of whether Microsoft will get the Web 2.0 label.
When people create such pictures of you, you know you are the ultimate evangelist:
From the ultra entertaining: http://fakesteve.blogspot.com/