So what did I actually want to see in terms of hardware? Let’s take a look:

1. Albeit less essential (relatively speaking) wireless charging would certainly be a welcome feature. I don’t mean that recent technology that powers devices at a distance, instead I’m referring to those pads that you put your devices on that charges them. I’d like to invest in a couple of those and leave them around the house to keep devices juiced.
2. There are some truly innovative products out there to provide much better audio without increasing weight or complexity in devices. The iPad has a seemingly tiny mono speaker, that I’m confident is going to leave me disappointed, whether giving a presentation or trying to watch some TED videos.
3. No camera? That’s a good way to keep this from being a gift for non-tech savvy relatives and being a living room fixture that actually stood a chance of replacing the use of the mobile and landline phones (now the Skype can make calls over 3G or even cumbersome TVs). No doubt that this is coming soon, but I think this was definitely a foolish sacrifice for the first generation. Likely to be able to make the battery life claims that are made without having to do too much research and development or delaying release.
4. HDMI, without better audio, higher quality video etc, how am I going to enjoy the videos etc that I happen to download or want to share on my iPad? So I can’t pop over to a friend’s house and with a single cable pour out high definition content into the flat screen TV that hangs on their wall? This is a real use case even in business today. Not even a thought of this scenario? For shame.
5. I know the “stylus” concept is a bit passé at this point, but not when it records what you’re hearing while you make your notes, which are subsequently converted from handwriting into actual documents. After all, apple called this device the iPad right? This use case takes shape in nearly every way you can imagine, and unlike other products that exist, the data is already stored in a device (or easily synced) in such a way that you can manipulate it easily.
6. The mobile landscape is changing with the proliferation of free WIFI in communities and businesses, but the roll out of 4G is also on the horizon by many service providers as well. Granted, some mobile companies are admittedly removing the bottlenecks from their 3G networks, but mobile standards must be backwards compatible, so why not give a device that cannot be upgraded more longevity?
7. Only 802.11n support? What about the new “hub-less” WIFI technology that allows wireless devices to directly discover and interface with each other at high speed? Not having forward thinking features makes me think that this device is supposed to be disposed of annually, I mean upgraded. And not the healthy upgrades like swapping out modems or memory or disk, unhealthy ones where the entire unit is tossed or sold on eBay if I somehow find the time.
8. Bluetooth 3, where is that? There are already devices with the standard and most of us gadget lovers already know that we still have a pairing and performance issues with our Bluetooth networks as it is, even with the enhanced data rate devices that are available now.
9. Video is actually key here, where is the 1080p? Even youtube.com, vimeo.com etc supports this standard now, how can this be missing today. The Simpson’s is finally widescreen after 20 years, let’s keep taking steps forward.
10. One of my use cases is using the device for travel, this includes in a car. However, I can’t use this for turn-by-turn directions without a decent speaker, so I guess I will have to look at the screen in that case? A bit dangerous. I guess this thing is going to remain in its specially designed Apple carry case anyway since there’s no active GPS. Garmin can breath a sigh of relief.
11. The battery life is impressive, but at the compromise (no doubt) of multi-tasking support. So after completing that thought, the battery life is NOT impressive. So where is multi-tasking support? Even my RIM BlackBerry 8800 could manage that even with its rubbish interface.

For completeness I should mention that the lack of Flash support is not a concern of mine, all of the largest videos sites are supporting HTML 5 as are the browsers that I love.

If having these features means that I have to spend more, I certainly will. Knowing that subsequent operating system updates with richen my productivity and allow for greater innovation in the app’s that are developed. But what I won’t do is make compromises on these points unless I can find a reason to compromise my use cases as well: presentations, travel, business tasks, conferences/seminars etc. All of these uses cases (and more) demand a device of the description I’ve made. We’ll see if Apple will ever cater to such a small sector of their market, the hardcore.

Historically, search engine companies (Google, Yahoo!, Bing etc) are among the original innovating web application developers and their success has afforded them with the resources to learn how to scale applications. In particular, Google has been working diligently (as does Yahoo) to contribute to the web developer community, increasing awareness and providing research about creating good experiences with web content. Today they’ve even released their solution to the performance issues surround Domain Name Service (DNS) and with their Google Public DNS project. DNS is the process by which your browser determines which server to query for the pages you request.

It has probably always played a role in the background in some way, but is now a talking point — the speed of a web site is instrumental in how Google determines the rank of your site in search engine result pages. While there may be numerous opinions on the topic, the fact remains that speed is vital to a positive user experience and a healthy eco-system, so those facts make any opinions quite moot. You can now find Google’s opinion on the speed of your web site in Webmaster Tools, in the site performance section (currently still a labs feature). Take a look and see how your site compares to the rest of the web.

WordPress is an extremely popular open source content management system and publishing tool. I contribute to the performance of WordPress via W3 Total Cache, which (from a bird’s eye view) accomplishes a number of goals:

• Make servers more green by reducing the resource demands in delivering dynamic content
• Reduce load time of sites, thereby providing the benefits stated above
• Allow bloggers and other WordPress plugin developers to continue to focus on producing content and easy-to-deploy functionality for WordPress without having to worry about performance penalties / implementation issues or keep an eye on their WordPress installation.

The action items to implement the largest performance wins for web applications traditionally include the following:

• Progressive render: It’s imperative that CSS and JavaScript are properly embedded into web pages to ensure that the user begins to see content displaying as quickly as possible. The term progressive render literally implies that the web site loads instantly with a water fall effect rather than showing users a white page for several seconds and drawing the entire page at once. Proper use of this technique is realized through careful placement and embedding of CSS and JavaScript in the head of the page. As well as loading JavaScript near the end of the page in addition to using pipelining techniques to overcome download limitations in some browsers.
• Reduce HTTP Transactions: This technique takes shape in 3 ways:

  HTTP Compression: the smaller the file, the faster it can be generated, sent and rendered or executed. Gzip or deflate compression is supported by modern browsers and is one of the most fundamental performance wins in web development.

  Minification: the staple technique of Yahoo.com, Google.com and Bing.com for years and instrumental in the “1 second page loads” they appear to have. Combining CSS and JavaScripts respectively, removing white space, comments, line breaks and even inserting CSS and JavaScript inline in the document, (if also compressed) ensures that the least amount of data is sent to the browser.

  Image Sprites: combining multiple images into a single file and using CSS to manipulate them on the page. Since your browser will download a larger image faster (in practice) than numerous smaller images, this is a real performance win when coupled with browser-side caching.

  These methods make sure that there are fewer “calls” to a web server to deliver a page. When it comes to performance, less is more.

• Caching: Cache everything and cache often! Words to that effect are the mantra of hard core web developers. This technique includes setting expiration time for CSS, JavaScript, and images etc that are downloaded from your site. It also includes, caching pages, database queries, RSS feeds and so forth so that your web server spends time sending content instead of generating it. Don’t forget that Content Delivery Networks are also a very important type of cache that significantly reduce the latency of content intended for a global audience.

Will it ever be enough? Doubtful. And there’s much more to it than the few items I listed. Google is already more than kicking tires on their new take on how web enabled devices should communicate. A very ambitious endeavor, but for Google who is bold enough to deploy HTML5 on their main property (Google.com), I’d have to say that they’ve got the resources to see it through. And as always it’s easy to see the wake of Steve Souders’ contributions to web application performance – no doubt a vital contributor at Google (the page speed Firefox plugin?), formerly of Yahoo fame.

The takeaway is this, on the horizon, there will be more talk about the performance of your site and that in turn will raise the bar and awareness in the open source community about how to make high performance applications, the reasons to do it and with which tools to measure those results.

In February, 2006, the US Senate Commerce held hearings in Washington that may well affect your on-line business. And, despite the fact that e-commerce growth out-paces brick-and-mortar, same-store growth by 96% annually (since 2000), no one noticed these important hearings. A short piece in the Wall St. Journal, 68 seconds on the evening news, a sound bite here and there, and the question of maintaining a neutral network faded from public consciousness like Vanilla Ice.

And this is important to our on-line industry!

What is a neutral network?
It’s what we have now.

On today’s Internet, all bits are created equal. No preference is given to one transmission over another. Data moves from place to place in a “best practices” sort of way, but no one receives preferential treatment, right?

Consider this. The pipelines that hook us all together (interconnectivity) can no longer handle the traffic load. Just as there are traffic jams on the highway, there are traffic jams on the Information Super-Highway — and they’re going to get worse.

Throughout the entire history of the Net, data has been delivered on a ‘first-come, first-served’ basis. It’s blind egalitarianism. My byte just as important as yours. Which means, when there’s a data-jam, your jpg of the kids’ birthday party receives equal access to Net facilities as the daily accounts of an overseas bank or Fortune 50 company. Now that’s what the Internet is all about.

What’s the dispute?
Money. Bet you didn’t see that coming. It’s all about money — and lots of it.

With the ever-expanding menu of net services, from video and music downloads to podcasts, the demand for data transmission space is increasing — quickly! Daily. And that brings into play the Economics 101 concept of supply and demand. Where demand is greater than supply, prices rise. And that’s what the owners of the Net’s infrastructure want to happen. A rise in prices.

Content vs. Infrastructure
There are two, distinct branches of the Internet experience. First, there are those companies that provide the nuts-and-bolts infrastructure that makes the net possible. We’re talking telephone companies, cable companies, hybrids and hard-wired companies like Cisco and Intel. These are the investor darlings that provide the means to deliver Internet content.

Then there’s the content side of the experience. Google, Napster, Amazon and a few million other on-line sources of data deliver the stuff that passes through the infrastructure (see above) before showing up on you monitor.

Now, the content people want to keep things just the way they are. The vast majority of these ‘pixel publishers’ want to keep unfettered access for all. The infrastructure guys see dollar signs. They want to change the very heart and soul of the Internet and undercut its raison d’etre.

Preferred Pricing
So, what if the infrastructure companies started offering premium services for a price? What if certain users were given preferential access to transmission services — for a fee? It would be like the commuter fast lanes you see on highways.

This would mean that your jpg would sit stalled for a minute or two (or longer) while the data from the overseas bank zips right through. It’s like cutting in line. You didn’t do it in third grade, you don’t do it now.

But that’s what the Senate Commerce Committee was considering during public hearings in February, 2006. The concept of preferred pricing programs should send shivers down the spine of everyone from Jeff Bezos, founder and CEO of Amazon.com, to the smallest site owner on the W3.

Death to Preferred Pricing
The reason the Internet has become such a vital, robust part of our professional and personal lives is because it is endlessly innovative. It brings together the collective smarts, creativity and business acumen of the worldwide community. New ideas are developed and implemented in weeks and months, not years.

The Internet is wild. Law enforcement is spotty, black hats are always at the gates, but the Internet dynamic encourages new thinking, new strategies and new ways to expand the economy. (Are you kidding? Google’s per share price went up 100% in fiscal year 2005. You better believe numbers like that have an impact on the economy.)

It’s the wide-open, level playing field that has made the Net such a potent force for innovation and such an important part of the US economy. Preferred pricing would change that level playing field, meaning some other company’s data would receive a faster ride than your equally precious data.

So, Are We Just Going to Take This?
What do you think? There’s just too much at stake here, regardless of what position you play on that level playing field. Webmasters, hosting companies, site owners, content providers — the proposed legislation under consideration must be stopped and the Internet community has the power to do just that.

First, contact your senators and congressional representatives. Send e-mails. Lots of them. Keep the Internet Free. Power to the People!

Second, use your outlets to spread the word. Put up a notice on your home page to Free the Net from the bean counters and link to this article.

It’s not too late to keep the Net out of the hands of Verizon, Comcast and SBC/ATT and keep it open for the little guys hatching the next Google in their garage right now.

Free the Net!

Is it a movement? A revolution? Perhaps a new paradigm? Or, is it a bunch of hype designed to sell a bunch of new software? Just what is Web 2.0?

Well, the term has been around since 2003. It was coined by I-Net pioneer Dale Dougherty and introduced at a conference by Tim O’Reilly of O’Reilly Media, Inc., who has subsequently made attempts at defining just what Web 2.0 means. In his seminal document entitled What Is Web 2.0: Design Patterns and Business Models for the Next Generation of Software, O’Reilly describes Web 2.0 as follows:

“Like many important concepts, Web 2.0 doesn’t have a hard boundary, but rather, a gravitational core. You can visualize Web 2.0 as a set of principles and practices that tie together a veritable solar system of sites that demonstrate some or all of those principles, at a varying distance from that core.” Tim O’Reilly

Okay, that’s a starting point of sorts — gravitational core, set of principles and practices, veritable solar system. The fact is, O’Reilly, the champion of Web 2.0, has written eloquently on the subject, but after reading his detailed explanation, you still walk away scratching your head. Additional research clearly demonstrates that there’s a lack of consensus.

Tim Bray, writing at http://radar.oreilly.com/, strongly contests the use of the term Web 2.0, calling it nothing more than a meme. Okay, so what’s a meme? Well, we have to go back to 1976 to find the origin of the term created by Richard Dawkins in his text, The Selfish Gene. In it, Dawkins describes memes broadly:

“Examples of memes are tunes, ideas, catch-phrases, clothes fashions, ways of making pots or of building arches. Just as genes propagate themselves in the gene pool by leaping from body to body via sperms or eggs, so memes propagate themselves in the meme pool by leaping from brain to brain via a process which, in the broad sense, can be called imitation.”

Okay, now we’re getting somewhere. Web 2.0 is a catch phrase and one that’s getting a lot of attention within the e-commerce community. In fact, since making its way into the collective I-conscious, there have been more than 9 million Google searches for Web 2.0 information. Somebody’s interested.

Yes, there’s something there, and when you cut through the hype, delete the meme and study the underlying concepts, Web 2.0 does offer some thinking points for every site designer, host and owner. Let’s look at some of the parameters of this new way of thinking about the www.

Extreme Trust
A great catch phrase in its own right. Extreme trust is a new vision for using the collective knowledge of Internet users, demonstrated by the ascendancy of Wikipedia. In the world of Web 1.0 (the model for the past decade), the Internet was a source of information. However, the information was static. You could access World Book or The Encyclopedia Britannica on-line, but all you could do is read it, print it out and use it for your child’s homework.

Sites, such as Wikipedia and the Open Directory Project are changing this dynamic based on the concept of extreme trust.

Wikipedia is a growing collection of information (over 100,000 unique entries) submitted and edited by volunteers. It changes daily, hourly, providing the latest information from a variety of writers of varying degrees of expertise. Information can be edited by anyone who knows more about the topic than the original poster. In fact, if you access certain topics on Wikipedia, you’ll see warnings that certain encyclopedia entries have not been reviewed, and therefore, the content can’t be deemed as accurate — yet. However, as more experts, operating under the doctrine of extreme trust, review each Wikipedia entry, the reliability and veracity of the content increases.

Thus, in the Web 1.0 world, people could access information, but not participate in its evolution. In the new age of Web 2.0, the collective intelligence of the world community becomes accessible and utile.

Personal Participation
Another, much-touted aspect of Web 2.0 is personal participation. Personal web sites have been around for years. You could post family pix and tell the world what you did over summer vacation. But, these personal web sites never really caught on because of the expense and time required to launch and maintain them.

Enter the web log, aka blog. These personal journals encourage greater, individual participation by enabling anyone with an opinion, idea or random thought to post these personal musings for all the world to see. Bloggers have changed the way information is disseminated. Many have garnered credibility as legitimate news sources. In fact, bloggers have received press credentials for newsworthy events. They’re used by the mainstream media as reference and several of these bloggers have broken major news stories before their larger print and on-line competitors, e.g., Robert Novak’s outing of Valerie Plame as a CIA operative.

The concept of personal participation has also spilled over into the realm of e-commerce, with many on-line businesses offering a blog and/or forum where customers, clients and other interested parties can post their thoughts. Amazon.com is a leader in this area, encouraging its customers to submit reviews of purchased products. In fact, some Amazon reviewers have made names for themselves — and customers seek out their recommendations! As the old, anti-war chant once demanded, Power to the People has been finally realized.

In fact, if you tour the Amazon site, you’ll discover opportunities for customer participation on virtually every page. Amazon’s subsidiary, Booksurge.com has also simplified the entire publishing process. Authors no longer have to approach traditional publishers, hat in hand, begging to be published. Booksurge and Amazon have made it possible for anyone to write, publish and sell texts through Amazon, B&N, Borders and other on-line outlets. Yes, this is part of the Web 2.0 model.

Static versus Dynamic
Netscape was the browser of choice in the Web 1.0 era. It was published, then updated regularly in various versions identified as Netscape 1.0, 2.0, etc. This was a static business model in which users had to wait for improvements to be made, then download the updates.

Fast forward to the dynamic age of Web 2.0 where Google reigns supreme. Google is a true child of the Internet. It was made to fit with I-net dynamics. Improvements are made and implemented daily — seamlessly. No downloads, no patches required. The result? Google has enabled all of us to access the most obscure factoid in a nanosecond. Its index contains well over 1 billion pages of spidered text and that figure is growing at a phenomenal rate.

Google has demonstrated how to do it right. It’s highly interactive, it’s never static and it has created many new avenues for the e-commerce community and for users in search of the name of the pharaoh who was in power when the rotary mill was introduced in Egypt. This has increased productivity exponentially.

The Evolution of Technology
Technology evolves. It builds on what came before. It learns from past mistakes and takes advantage of unrealized opportunities. This is as true of America’s Industrial Revolution as it is for the Internet. There were lots of false starts, missteps and abject failures during the rise of technology in the early and mid-1800s. The same is true of the current technological revolution underway on your computer screen daily.

Remember the original Priceline model? You could spend two hours saving 9¢ on a can of peas. Nice try, but no cigar, despite William Shatner’s campy commercials. Or, how about buying pet foods on-line? That went down in flames, too. In fact, all you have to do is look at the I-net bubble that burst in 2000 to see the shake-out of what was working and what wasn’t. A lot of investors lost a ton of cash, but the Net didn’t shrivel up and die. In fact, it’s more powerful than ever.

Technology doesn’t move forward in straight line. It never has. There are offshoots, improvements and lots of really, really bad ideas along the way. (Anybody remember the Ford Edsel?) Internet technology is no different, except that the shakeouts occur much faster, the improvements take off much quicker and the really, really bad ideas are really, really expensive. Just ask Shatner. Such is the nature of technological evolution.

So, Is Web 2.0 A Revolution?
Tim O’Reilly and the other promoters of Web 2.0 have done us a service by focusing attention on new uses for the Net. RSS is a radical step forward. Podcasting, though in its infancy, is coming on strong having caught the attention of advertisers as a new means to reach the cutting edge public. In fact, just as anyone can set up and maintain a blog, today the technology exists to set up your own broadcast network complete with specialized shows for niche markets like pregnant parents or home schoolers.

However, Web 2.0 also has aspects of a meme. Many on-line businesses have picked up the term and now proudly display a Web 2.0 logo on their home pages, though the site has virtually no new features.

No, Web 2.0 isn’t a new paradigm or a revolution. It’s the natural evolution of a technology that’s growing at truly heart-stopping speed. What was yesterday won’t be tomorrow.

In the weeks and months ahead, we’ll take a much closer look at this evolutionary track to sort hype from help, and to assist you in finding new, better ways to increase site traffic, improve your conversion rate and expand your repeat-customer base.

For now, Google Web 2.0 and start doing your homework. Changes are coming. Will you be ready? If not, you won’t be here tomorrow.