Web 2.02 - Interactive
An excellent post by Nick Bradbury, citing the current Web 2.0 hype and stating that the desktop still has a place. Steve Makofsky also weighs in here, as does Robert Scoble. But at this point, I'd like to disagree with Robert.
For me, streaming HDTV is irrelevant. I've yet to find a good definition of "Web 2.0", but I'm pretty sure that fast, reliable interactivity is a key component, which rules out streaming as an interesting feature.
I'd like to add another rule to Nick's:
Certain classes of applications cannot, by definition, be instantiated as a web service.
Well, for the foreseable future anyhow.
Of course, by this I mean a rather large subset of interactive entertainment. E.g. Games.
Yes, you can download a flash app, but at that point it's a local application. Yes, you can run something from Wild Tangent. Again, at that point it's effectively a local application streaming content.
For the smarts of the application to be remoted we need might higher bandwidth than is currently available today, and more to the point exponentially lower latencies.
I don't know about you, but I like my interactivity to happen at least at 30 hertz.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Web 2.02 - Interactive.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.steve-lacey.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-bar.cgi/603
An light online application that streams content from a server has one big and obvious advantage:
To run the latest release, you just have to hit F5.
Thought, I think you are right in that (at leat for the next 10 years) desktops apps will stay more efficient.
Anyway, before any change to happen, users will need to change their minds... and it can take a while.