Comments by Jonas Bolinder

Imho, the 62 page introduction is not comprehensible to regular 9-year-olds, rather 12-13-year-olds. I think I was about 15-16, when I started with BASIC back in the day.Scratch is probably better suited for smaller kids, 8 and up, whereas Alice seems to be aimed chiefly at college kids. [Trackback]

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

Platforms are a tool for vendor lock-in, but might be useful for a publisher to more easily reach an established user base.The ultimate open platform is the Web itself.
[TrackBack]

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

Neighbors, kind of generated, automatic "friends", seems like an interesting idea with lots of possibilities for sites with a community of people. Highlighted here. [TrackBack]

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

Seems like a useful feature (understatemently).
Highlighted in this post.

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

An argument often put forward against using XML for serializing data is the overhead caused by the verbosity of the language. As a document description language however it is well suited, imho. Anyway, XML-RPC featured in this week's highlights :-).

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

My first disqus comment. As I mentioned on FriendFeed, I agree that there really is no need for new OSes. Linux is a good example, it has just a version number that keeps incrementing. It'll probably always be called Linux. An exception might be if MS makes a complete rewrite, perhaps a windows-less OS, is it the promise of Midori?

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

The game quality is surprisingly high, and it's easy to get stuck playing :). I made this tiny review of PlayCrafter.

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

There can never be enough of Josh! Sad to see you leaving.
I think you were the best writer at RWW, English wise not the least. Good luck in the future!

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

An interesting subject that urged me to comment. Here some random thoughts:If you write a comment, I think you own it in the same way as you own the content of a blog post you write (assuming you post it publicly, provide a feed etc.) That is, others, including the site owner, has the right to link to it, publish an excerpt, or even republish the whole comment, as long as he or she gives proper attribution and does not change the wording of the comment.If you intend to republish the comment to monetize it in a direct manner, like selling a book, maybe you should ask for permission if the comment is significant in terms of length and/or originality.Since the comment lives on someone else's site, the site owner has the right to remove it if it's offensive, breaks some law, is spammy etc. But here it becomes interesting where to draw the line of what's ok and what's not. Should you allow comments that are only insignificantly related to the subject of the post, is clearly intended to just promote some other content, or maybe seems to be relevant, but is just cleverly disguised to promote something else?I think that you should be cautious in removing comments that are not clearly spam, unless you explicitly state on your blog or site that certain types of comments will be removed. Otherwise, if you remove some legitimate comment, you effectivly practice censorship, and could (or should) be publicly blamed.My two cents, perhaps slightly off topic, let's see if it gets removed.
/JonasThis comment is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License. :-D

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

I actually like nerd better, it's less pretentious than entrepreneur. As long as you are successful (or just happy) I guess it doesn't matter.

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

@Confused: A bit late to the discussion, but you can always start with my review of Web 3.0.

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

Maybe Microsoft should drop the whole Live concept and start concentrating on creating useful and innovative services instead, like the smorgasbord offer of Yahoo!?
(smorgasbord, btw is derived from the Swedish word "smörgåsbord", literally meaning "table of sandwiches" (for a Swedish guy like me, this is noteworthy))Parenthetical note:
I spotted a small typo in the last sentence of the second paragraph from bottom. Hint: The first commenter got it right.
(I hope you don't think I'm trolling too offensively or frequently in your comments' area, please let me know if that's the case :-))
/Jonas

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

I agree there's just the Web. Problem is, if you just say the Web, ordinary people, who might have heard of Web 2.0 as the next big thing, might think you are behind the curve. Similarly, if you say Web 3.0, people might think you are ahead. So, from a marketing point of view the versioning of the Web is probably here to stay, until we come up with a better name.What was good about the expression Web 3.0, especially last year, was that it was fairly new and caused a lot of controversy as soon as it was mentioned. Today I feel that there is a "Web 3.0 fatigue" in the same way that we have a Facebook fatigue (I hope that I am wrong here ;-) )Maybe it is time to throw Web 3.0 in the Deadpool, and come up with some new controversial expression that annoys enough of people, so we get some great discussions. Robert Scoble once suggested Web 2007, which obviously is inadequate today, but perhaps a code name instead of a number, like Web Zebra or something. Probably this is too confusing, so we'll be better off just sticking to Web 3.0.
/Jonas

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

@Josh & Curdnerd: You could also just look at Web 3.0 as a synonym for the future or next Web, imho.The big story over at Techmeme today is obviously Microsoft's Live Mesh, a platform for synchronization of data across multiple devices. If this is the future, it can be seen as a vote for the APIs and web services promise of Web 3.0.Having a look at the comments so far to this post, there seems to be quite a lot of sceptics to the expression Web 3.0: #1 thinks it's marketing bull, #2 too early, #11 yesterday's news, #12 also too early, #13 blather.In favor of the mobile web is #7 and #9. The semantic web #6. Artificial intelligence #4 and #17. Personalization and recommendation #18 and #22.Let's see if there will be any more votes.
/Jonas

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

I am slowly recovering from the shock of seeing my posts mentioned at RWW!
Thanks,
Jonas

Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweet

1. « Previous
2. Page:
3. 1
4. 2
5. Next »