A key point of ridicule for Web 2.0 is the endless use of non-final version releases - Perpetual Beta. As I've observed before, Flickr is a notable offender.
Now they have either done it again with the most ridiculous version yet; or maybe they've finally realised that they can call it whatever they want - they're taking money so it's bloody well final.
Flickr has gone through alpha, beta, gamma and now the logo just says "loves you" where it used to say gamma. It's certainly an odd version number. What comes next? Flickr "loves you more... no you hang up... no!... ok let's hang up together... 1, 2, 3... you didn't hang up!".
Sure, Flickr's a great service - I paid up after all - but their approach to version numbering is weird. Not to mention the fact that at this point, the numbers are only really useful internally. Marking a site as Beta just alerts people that the service is not finalised. Flickr really can't argue that point any more.
So anyway, Flickr loves us. Does that mean it's out of gamma? :) The logo's file name is flickr_logo_gamma.gif.v1.5.gif so who knows.
Update: Mystery solved! Turns out a couple got married after meeting on Flickr, so the crew at Flickr were having some fun marking the occasion. Awww ;)
Labels: flickr, loves you, version numbers, web 2.0, web 2.0mfg
So it's just a few short sleeps to Web Directions 2006. Or, as it's been called for a few days now, Web Directions South. That'd be the green one. The orange one will be announced on Monday :)
After Web Essentials 2005 many of us did wonder what the organisers could come up with in 2006 - WE05 was a hard act to follow. So far we have Tshirts and a microformat- and API-driven networking system. Web 2.0 is nothing more than a slogan to many people; but WD06 is living the dream ;)
So if you're heading to WD06, get over to Web Connections and sign up. Sure, you'll probably get tagged by weirdos, but that's all part of the fun!
On a quick personal note; you may notice my Web Connections profile lists my new employer: News Interactive. I didn't mention it in the previous post since I felt like it was a little silly to talk about it before I was actually here. So, there you have it :)
Labels: social networking, wd06, web 2.0, web connections, web directions, web directions south
It's the Web 2.0 dream, man :)
Labels: humour, web 2.0, web 2.0mfg
Like a child refusing to count to ten, Flickr has found yet another way to stall the idea of acting like they have released a product. We've had alpha and beta, now Flickr has gone into gamma: FlickrBlog | Alpha... Beta... Gamma! I can't help but wonder if we're going to go through every step to omega before they try 1.0.
Seriously - I don't understand what the harm would be in just drawing a line in the code and calling it v1.0. They have thousands of users and presumably millions of photos. The system works. They provide support. They take money.
Web 2.0 chic ran out somewhere during beta. C'mon Flickr, go 1.0!
Labels: flickr, permanent beta, version numbers, web 2.0, web 2.0mfg
Google Trends: "web 2.0": Web 2.0: It's big in San Francisco...
Labels: web 2.0
Plazes is pretty cool, but if you get the latitude and logitude wrong... suddenly Brisbane airport is somewhere in New South Wales: plazes.beta Plaze:Brisbane Airport/Australia/4007/Brisbane/Banksia Place.
Plus there are some limits to localisation - Australia does not have 'zip' codes, for example; we have postcodes. But then it probably doesn't matter - since most of our television is American, the average Joe probably does know that a zip code is like our postcodes. Plus I'm pretty sure they had to forward the phone number 911 through to 000 (our real emergency number). But I digress.
The real point to be observed is that systems are only as good as the information people put into them. Enthusiasm doesn't replace accuracy, nor does a person's willingness to enter information imply they'll proofread it first.
Still, it's fair to say that I am surprised how well community sites can work. You just have to be a bit cautious: is that Wikipedia entry accurate? ...or is the page in the middle of an edit war and someone just rewrote it with an extreme bias?
Web 2.0: remember, more signal means more noise too.
Labels: folksonomy, web 2.0
