web 2.0 is just hype with no content.

I hate all those 'integrated solutions' anyway, they combine the worst elements of everything into a seemless useless whole that's good for nothing.

And I will NEVER give my business secrets to any website by using some sort of web based business application (and I think the company I work for made a major mistake when they decided to do just that for all their financial and marketing data).

[QUOTE=jwenting;251284]I hate all those 'integrated solutions' anyway, they combine the worst elements of everything into a seemless useless whole that's good for nothing.[QUOTE]

I really don't think that's true. The whole point is to simplify and streamline everything, to figure out what information is relevant, and when and where.

This is especially true for people who don't live their lives in front of their monitors. Web 2.0 is, in part, an attempt to pinpoint the simplest and most usefull applications for people who for the most part don't necessarily need a desktop computer. They could do with a simple appliance which only allows for web-browsing. And elegant, web-based applications fit right in.

I don't want to get too deep into my philosphy (well, maybe just outrageous opinions =P) on the technology industry, but I feel like most of it is useless. And instead of developing outward and coming up with more and more and more products to sell, we should look inward at how to simplify and reorganize what's available to an end which makes the core functions of most people's computers more usefull in a much lower profile tool.

In other words the greatest common denominator of all the dumbed down features of every wizzard.
Proves my point

I would say Google is a very good example of web applications. Have you ever looked at the features page?

Eh, wizards suck because they make the program use too linear. I just think programmers shouldn't be afraid to leave out features that aren't useful, rather than take the 'dumb' approach and add everything.

Yes, I have been using Google, Yahoo, and MS Live quite a bit over the past few months. And they all have their problems. With gmail I don't like their lack of support for importing and exporting messages. You have to telnet to your SMTP server and send commands manually to do this.

Also, while conversation views are sometimes usefull, they sometimes are counterproductive - gmail should let you break up a conversation if you want to.

There are also other things that bother me, but the biggest is how loosely integrated they all are. MS and Yahoo have much tighter solutions.


btw, overall I think Google is the best. I use gmail regularly, and only Yahoo and Live to play around with.

please tell that to the language design team responsible for creating the featurelist for the next Java version...

http://www.microsoft.com/uc/Default....ures&CE=Medium