[FoRK] portals vs time
luis.villa at gmail.com
Mon Jan 31 16:24:49 PST 2005
Just out of curiosity, what are the properties of this better client?
On Mon, 31 Jan 2005 14:02:34 -1000 (HST), Lucas Gonze <lgonze at panix.com> wrote:
> My mail client is still Pine, even after regularly trying out
> alternatives. I can easily imagine a better mail client and can't
> understand why it doesn't exist yet.
> - Lucas
> On Mon, 31 Jan 2005, Stephen D. Williams wrote:
> > I absolutely agree.
> > I am extremely reluctant to create structured bits in any structure that I
> > don't have complete, immediate, flexible, and guaranteed permanent access to.
> > I end up using email as my primary knowledgebase because it meets those
> > requirements but overall that's a poor solution. I have been reluctant with
> > blogs for the same reason.
> > Wikis like TWiki actually pass the test well in some ways, but aren't enough.
> > I've been attacking the semantic-everything problem from a number of angles
> > and hope to "go semantic" this year, both personally and professionally.
> > (Where "attacking" includes analysis churn of acquiring and understanding
> > exactly what everyone means and is doing and the history involved.)
> > sdw
> > Strata R. Chalup wrote:
> >> The long thread of messages about Flickr and GMail and similar doesn't seem
> >> to include my main issue with JS portal-type sites, no matter how
> >> well-done, and that is LAG.
> >> Sure, it's quick. Sure, they have zillions of servers, yada yada. But no
> >> one seems to take into account all the wasted time in *point and click*.
> >> I can do any task on the command line in a fraction of the time it takes to
> >> nav somebody's portal site, upload stuff, etc. All these tasks require me
> >> to pause between steps and wait. Some of this can be solved by plug-ins.
> >> However the plug-ins themselves are often to applications which in
> >> themselves are graphical point and click.
> >> The real kicker comes in migration of data from one of these services to
> >> another, or from one's own computer up to the portal. Moving things from
> >> portal to portal requires recreating the value added by the portal in the
> >> first place, eg the comments, or the grouping into albums, or whatever.
> >> For most of these portals, any time I invest in adding value to my raw
> >> content is tied to the portal and lost. For a few portals, like
> >> LiveJournal, I have the option to spend even more time massaging exported
> >> data to retain the value. I'd have been, in some cases, better off just
> >> keeping entries as raw txt paras with minimal embedded markup and applying
> >> style sheets or my own PHP. Etc.
> >> XML is *not* a sufficiently 'portable' form, since essentially each portal
> >> site has its own flavor of schema. What is truly needed is a base-level
> >> schema for peering/portal sites, so that people have mobility for data and
> >> there is opportunity for true data exchange. Especially exchange with the
> >> user's computing base and the portal site!
> >> I haven't yet found a portal that is worth long-term adoption when the
> >> long-term time penalty is factored into it. The closest I've come is LJ,
> >> posting from a local client, and I'm finding that it's too hard to reply to
> >> comments when compared to email-- if the commenter is not a paid account,
> >> and thus has no user at livejournal.com address, the load/click/reply/view
> >> cycle to leave even one response takes the time of 2 - 3 email responses.
> >> Give me flavored rsync, or a portal that supports cfengine, rather than all
> >> these 'elegant' interfaces, please! Give me a pure email interface, with
> >> no webbyness required for interaction between portal users! Perhaps I am a
> >> dinosaur, but perhaps I merely have perspective. But as my friend JXH is
> >> fond of saying, "User suffering increases in direct proportion to knowledge
> >> of a better way."
> >> _SRC
> > --
> > swilliams at hpti.com http://www.hpti.com Per: sdw at lig.net http://sdw.st
> > Stephen D. Williams 703-724-0118W 703-995-0407Fax 20147-4622 AIM: sdw
> > --
> > No virus found in this outgoing message.
> > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
> > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.2 - Release Date: 01/28/2005
> > _______________________________________________
> > FoRK mailing list
> > http://xent.com/mailman/listinfo/fork
> FoRK mailing list
More information about the FoRK