I finally found an hour or two to read a bit more into OpenSocial - the innovation (?) promoted by Google to ‘make the web more social’.

On the homepage is a nice link to a 57 minute YouTube video - that I couldn’t get enough bandwidth to stream acceptably, so I watched the chunks - all six of them - and I’m feeling not very well.

How corny could they make this presentation? Initially I was put off by the symbolism of the fires, and the play on ‘open’:

“We believe this format of bringing developers together in an intimate setting to work collaboratively in the open, is the best way to engage with the developer community”

In other words, they approach a select few ‘partners’ and say ‘we’re going to make this big announcement - jump on board or miss the wagon!’ They make it look cosy by doing the presentation outside, but I doubt there was anyone in the ‘audience’ not part of the launch, and I’m surprosed they didn’t sing any songs - there was enough of a dance.

Google are starting to get on my nerves a bit - you can’t help but see them everywhere, and I’m getting a bit suspicious of motives.

I like the idea of OpenSocial - if I get it right - it’s like the Facebook developers platform, but open so anyone can use it. Great. But they seem to have gone a bit further by putting JavaScript gizmos and methods on top. Not so sure. I’m not a fan of all this Ajax - it too often is bling for bling’s sake and gets in the way of sensible functionality.

I’m not totally anti the rich user experience - times I’ve seen it done well it is neat, but it can be overdone, or inappropriately applied. Much like technology as a whole. I’m a KISS person myself.

So perhaps I should just concentrate on the Data APIs and concepts, and not get put off by the ’shiny’ distractions.

Anyway, back to OpenSocial - it seems to have a good amount of adoption by the PR - if there’s a critical mass it might take off. But I remember a similar hubub around OpenID and that one has gone quiet.

This open stuff is great for developers perhaps, but isn’t everything ending up looking the same? Yes MySpace jumped in because they’ve been hurt my the Facebook API no doubt. And all these business networks are all like LinkedIn - where’s the USP? They’ll all end up like Ning where it’s who’s using an application makes it stand out rather than the application itself.

First Safari mobile on the iPhone, now Opera Mini 4, it would seem that the trend for mobile browsers is to pretend they’re a Desktop, and to persuade sites not to dumb down the presentation enabling the browser to wow us with zooming etc. they’re ignoring handheld stylesheets. However, new CSS3 features like media queries which allow different stylesheets to be included based on for example screen size.

As discussed on Unintentionally Blank a few weeks back, the reasoning seems to be to save the users from the developers who apparently all want to dish up ‘dumbed down’ sites for mobile devices.

But surely we all agree that mobile devices are not desktop devices - you use them in different contexts and have different requirements. Whilst I appreciate that not all mobile users want a dumbed down site, let’s have choice rather than imposition. And taking away tools that can have a positive benefit if used properly is removing choice.

Performance problems again, but this time at an application level. So I finally get around to trying out PHP profiling tools in earnest. XDebug and WinCacheGrind give very useful information where a script is spending its time, without having to go dropping bits of benchmarking code around.

I know this is old news - I’ve just not had a real need before now. So I go hunting for good info on how to get the most from WinCacheGrind, and the project’s SourceForge homepage has a really interesting approach to livening up what could otherwise be a slightly dry geeky subject.

Not an approach I would feel adopting long term, but I thought I might try it out just once…

I’ve been doing a lot of reading and thinking on the theme of Mobile Web in anticipation for the Future of Mobile event this week. This has included trying for a few weeks now to get into ‘Mobile Web 2.0′ by Ajit Jankar and Tony Fish.

I’ve been finding it a little hard going, but perhaps I’m not target audience - the bit I’ve managed to get through so far has mostly been about semantics and business.

But there have been a couple of observations I’ve found interesting - the assertion that ‘capturing content at the point of inspiration‘ will be one of the main drivers of the Mobile Web 2.0, and the idea of mobile handsets as just one of the ’screens’ we use to interact with the web as a whole - others being broadcast screens e.g. TVs which we tend to sit and watch, and interactive screens e.g. PCs which have probably the ultimate user interface, and can be used to configyre the ‘big screen’.

This comes back to their first point that:

‘Mobile Web 2.0 devices will drive the capture of imagination. The information is not just pictures - but rather a range of things like: calendars (the things you need to remember); notes and reminders (viewpoints and ideas that you want to work on later); news (citizen’s reporting) etc. These will then be stored in your private web space.’

I get the idea, and can see it happenning one day, but I don’t think we’re ready yet. Despite the coming of Facebook and other ‘online personality’ applications, we haven’t quite widely adopted the ‘private web space’. Even writing this blog I have not been tempted to use my phone to capture inspiration (textually at any rate) the user interface is still too awful.

So what are phones good for and how could current devices be used to make the mobile Web succeed?

• Communication - the original ‘killer app’, but it needn’t just be voice, or SMS / email, but it could also be updating your Facebook or Twitter status, or forum / chat sites.
• Entertainment - MP3 player, streaming content, games, web surfing
• Navigation - most phones have GPS built in now and mobile mapping apps are widesprea
• Mobile search - information on the go: ‘where’s my nearest’ etc.
• Alerts - football scores, breaking news - pushed informationcan find you anywhere
• Content Capture - photo / video in addition to text / data

My view of the ones that will succeed? The ones that are enabled by or rely on the mobility of the device and are weakened without it.

You (nearly) always have your phone with you. Most devices now are more than adequate cameras and MP3 players in addition to phones; some are acceptable as email devices or PDAs.

The line between phone, camera, media player and satnav is blurring - these are turning into realy usable useful devices.

Any sort of web browsing that isn’t bookmarked or pushed to you is a right pain that puts up too big a barrier in my view - but improvements in technologies and user interfaces (e.g. the N95 and iPhone) are making this better. I don’t buy the ‘content at the point of inspiration’ as a major driver (yet).

For me this is still the least likely factor to drive the sucess of the Mobile web, but I’m keeping an open mind. If it were to work, Google would have bought moblog by now.

Tony, I’ll probably be the tallest chap at FoM if you want to argue the point.

The Open Handset Alliance sets out ‘to accelerate innovation in mobile and offer consumers a richer, less expensive, and better mobile experience‘. Their first project is Android, a complete open source mobile platform that allows full access to core phone functionality to any applications - such as accesing geographic location data with great potential for peer-peer social networking.

Will it succeed? I really do hope so, but competing against incredibly strong commercial offerings with a massive market share, it might take too long to get the critical mass to allow it to thrive. It needs a ‘must have’ killer app - the next SMS - something that ‘commercial’ handsets can’t do.

There seems to have been a lot of thought put into the licencing, to allow commercial interests to contribute applications whilst protecting their interests - it makes sense to me. If heavyweight alliance members like Google, T-Mobile and LG get behind it rather than just paying lip-service, and if there’s a good take up from early adopters developing real social apps, it could well stand a chance.

I’d be much more likely to buy an Android powered phone (a GPhone?) than an iPhone, let’s put it that way!

I’ve used Joomla! a few times in the past to deliver community based sites that need a CMS but can’t justify having huge amounts of time spent on developing the site. It’s taken a few goes, getting more comfortable every time (I’m too lazy to RTFM) but I might be starting to get it.

As with many things on the web, it’s not quite like anything else and there’s a critical mass of knowledge you have to accumulate before you really understand what’s going on and make good decisions.

I’ve been asked to help out with a site for a school - in theory Joomla! should be ideal.

My biggest challenge is deciding when to use static content and when to use the section/category com_content or whatever-it’s called. Ideal for blogging, news stories etc., but not so good for more brochureware type sites.

And then there’s the menu (navigation) - there seems to be a very tenuous link between the menu and the content - often you have to duplicate a content object with a menu item, then sort it, and if you want to change the type of object a menu item links to (Link - category item for instance) or the specific object - you have to delete it and make a new one.

It’s also a shame that the core user functionality can’t restrict users to specific areas of the site - you can’t have one group edit one area and another group manage a different one.

Anyway, I’m sure there are mods and bots that can address this, but I’ve been too lazy to find them - I’m managing to get it doing what I want now.

From the BBC News website:

Villagers resigned to a weekend of no Harry Potter due to rising flood waters were cheered to receive a surprise from their local postman.

Richard Yates, of Harvington near Evesham, Worcestershire, was unable to do his normal round because of floods.

He loaded up his car [a 4x4] with pre-ordered copies of the new Harry Potter book which were in the sorting office and delivered them around the village.

A neighbour said it was a wonderful gesture in the midst of flood misery.

Firstly - the guy deserves an award - posties like that (and our local chap, Dave, I can believe would have done similar - he’s a star too!) probably don’t get enough recognition - they make a very real difference to people’s lives.

But my main point is to say that occasionally - and I may be clutching at straws here - us 4×4 drivers do manage to justify our vehicles. When circumstances get bad - flood, snow, all the other things that Mother Nature can throw at us - you’ll be wishing you knew someone with a 4×4 to get you out of trouble.

I love my Landrover Discovery. I’ve had a Landrover of some sort for around 20 years now - from an ex-military Series III Lightweight, through a ‘79 Range Rover which is in a pile of bits waiting for time, enthusiasm and budget to ‘have some fun with’, and a ‘64 Series II.

My daily commute is almost a pleasure in my 4wd armchair, and on occasions I get to pull tree roots out, tow stranded vehicles, or pull loads of hay around.

But I’m being made to feel increasingly guilty because of my excessive carbon footprint.

Now I’m quite good the rest of the time - I very rarely go on holiday so no frequent flyer miles for me. We’re very good at recycling, and try to keep our energy use under control.

Discos on the whole aren’t as bad as they’re cracked up to be - mine has a 2.5 litre turbocharged diesel engine, and on average I get around 550 miles out of a 70 litre tank full. If I had a 4.2 litre v8 supercharged Range Rover Sport (as much as I would dream of one) or a Tuareg, or those silly Porsche things.

I’m not saying the rest of my life is perfectly eco-friendly, but I don’t think it’s too bad. Aren’t I allowed a little luxury?

I grew up on the edge of what used to be a naval airstation at Pulham St. Mary in Norfolk - chosen partly because it was a flat expanse with few trees with predictable winds. In July 1919 the British Airship R34 landed there aftermaking the first east-west crossing of the Atlantic by air - only missed being the first crossing period by two weeks.

Best part of a century later, and it could be those same attributes have made the site a target for a proposed onshore wind farm. When I first heard about the scheme which is currently going through the process of ‘scoping opinion‘, the idea of seven turbines 125m high (that’s a 30 storey block of flats, and as wind turbines go they’re huge) seems great to me - personally I think they look beautiful, and I’m under the impression that although they’re not a perfect all year source of energy, they’re better for the environment than a coal fired power station.

But there are locals very opposed to the idea, including some people I hold in very high regard, and I’ve been presented with some very striking arguments that make me rethink whether or not I’m being ‘NGA’ - Naieve, Gullible and Apathetic. Certainly not the latter, but I have to admit I could have been fooled into the first two.

I’ve heard arguments before that wind power is not as good as it’s made out to be, turbines are only producing efficiently 10-15% of the time (not liking strong wind any more than no wind) and much better suited to being sited offshore than onshore.

I can also believe thay’re not as green as they make out - like all statistics you can make them say anything you want so I take both sides with a pinch of salt.

The enthusiasm to build all of these things I can see may be suspect - is it to solve our impending power crisis, or is it to capitalise on grants and funding before they stop in 2010?

But the new issue to me in the case against the Pulham Wind Farm is the potential risk to health of those living within 2Km caused by incessant low frequency noise.

Who do you trust? Certainly I now don’t trust my percieved opinion and need to research this further.

A nice post on Lighthouses Forever publicises that one of the lighthouse cottages is for sale - has been for some time.

It’s tricky selling property in Happisburgh right now - there are some real bargains to be had before common sense prevails and Happisburgh stops being treated as a pariah village.

When the waters rise, Happisburgh will fare a lot better than many of the surrounding villages.

Nice plug for the Happisburgh Lighthouse website.