Comments on: Web 2.0 v. Doing Things Right http://www.obfuscated.org/2006/02/web-2-0-v-doing-things-right/ I will not explain what this weblog is all about in a few words. Mon, 30 Aug 2010 14:27:44 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: gavin http://www.obfuscated.org/2006/02/web-2-0-v-doing-things-right/comment-page-1/#comment-7 gavin Fri, 17 Feb 2006 13:41:40 +0000 #comment-7 <p>I think Joel Spolsky just has his (martini-glass emblazoned) boxers in a bunch because users flocked to his desktop web-publishing application in... well, notice how he doesn't talk about the roaring success of CityDesk at his site much. By all accounts it was excellent at what it did, yet the horrid bungle of patches that is most dynamic content-building websites just kicked it around the block.</p> <p>Anybody remember WordPerfect 6.0 or Norton Desktop for DOS? These elaborate, professionally-and-expensively-developed applications attempted to make character-mode DOS behave like Windows <em>after Windows 3.1 had been on the market for monts!</em></p> <p>Planning and executing carefully on something nobody wants, especially in a way where nobody can see what you're doing and course-correct you, is a disaster too.</p> I think Joel Spolsky just has his (martini-glass emblazoned) boxers in a bunch because users flocked to his desktop web-publishing application in… well, notice how he doesn’t talk about the roaring success of CityDesk at his site much. By all accounts it was excellent at what it did, yet the horrid bungle of patches that is most dynamic content-building websites just kicked it around the block.

Anybody remember WordPerfect 6.0 or Norton Desktop for DOS? These elaborate, professionally-and-expensively-developed applications attempted to make character-mode DOS behave like Windows after Windows 3.1 had been on the market for monts!

Planning and executing carefully on something nobody wants, especially in a way where nobody can see what you’re doing and course-correct you, is a disaster too.

]]> By: cp http://www.obfuscated.org/2006/02/web-2-0-v-doing-things-right/comment-page-1/#comment-265 cp Thu, 09 Feb 2006 17:28:11 +0000 #comment-265 <p>Oh, definitely. I make no claim to have even a vague understanding of any industry other than my own.</p> <p>Along the same lines, though, if you ask the <a href="http://www.agilealliance.org/" rel="nofollow" rel="nofollow">Agile</a> folk, they'll tell you that you should always deliver software on time. Some times you have to drop features to make that happen, but it's better to have a quality subset of your features done on time than to have crap that meets the spec fully or <em>nothing</em> that can be considered a product increment.</p> Oh, definitely. I make no claim to have even a vague understanding of any industry other than my own.

Along the same lines, though, if you ask the Agile folk, they’ll tell you that you should always deliver software on time. Some times you have to drop features to make that happen, but it’s better to have a quality subset of your features done on time than to have crap that meets the spec fully or nothing that can be considered a product increment.

]]> By: SLS http://www.obfuscated.org/2006/02/web-2-0-v-doing-things-right/comment-page-1/#comment-264 SLS Thu, 09 Feb 2006 15:29:16 +0000 #comment-264 <p>Perhaps the maxim, "Nobody will remember how quickly you get things done. They’ll only remember how well you do them," works in software, but it definitely doesn't hold true in the writing world. </p> <p>When I was first starting out, I can't tell you how many awesome gigs I lost out on by turning in great copy slightly after deadline. (Next morning after a COB deadline.) The editors would much rather have had B+ copy on time than A copy a few hours late. Perhaps this is because they were already planning on taking a second pass at it after it was handed in? That is, in their eyes the first draft that came in would never be an A. </p> <p>Hmmm....</p> Perhaps the maxim, “Nobody will remember how quickly you get things done. They’ll only remember how well you do them,” works in software, but it definitely doesn’t hold true in the writing world.

When I was first starting out, I can’t tell you how many awesome gigs I lost out on by turning in great copy slightly after deadline. (Next morning after a COB deadline.) The editors would much rather have had B+ copy on time than A copy a few hours late. Perhaps this is because they were already planning on taking a second pass at it after it was handed in? That is, in their eyes the first draft that came in would never be an A.

Hmmm….

]]> By: cp http://www.obfuscated.org/2006/02/web-2-0-v-doing-things-right/comment-page-1/#comment-263 cp Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:59:59 +0000 #comment-263 <p>Yeah, you're right. I guess I shy away from Greater Fool operations because you can only do it so many times before people catch on to the fact that you're a total sham.</p> Yeah, you’re right. I guess I shy away from Greater Fool operations because you can only do it so many times before people catch on to the fact that you’re a total sham.

]]> By: Christopher Smith http://www.obfuscated.org/2006/02/web-2-0-v-doing-things-right/comment-page-1/#comment-262 Christopher Smith Thu, 09 Feb 2006 12:15:25 +0000 #comment-262 <p>Dude, you are totally missing your point. Web 2.0 is fueled by the Greater Fool Theory. You leverage your knowledge in a scripting language to wire together a prototype that just barely works and then you get real paid for someone else to own it. Then you go laugh at them as they realize they have to rebuild the thing from scratch if they want to actually make it work for them. ;-)</p> Dude, you are totally missing your point. Web 2.0 is fueled by the Greater Fool Theory. You leverage your knowledge in a scripting language to wire together a prototype that just barely works and then you get real paid for someone else to own it. Then you go laugh at them as they realize they have to rebuild the thing from scratch if they want to actually make it work for them. ;-)

]]>