Reid Dossinger

Ezra Klein (one of my favorite follows on Twitter) posted some thoughts about Google+ vs Twitter, giving the nod to Google+. It's really not too surprising. He's a political writer and, as such, he'll want to be able to expand on his thoughts. Google+ gives him the space he needs for his thoughts and have conversations on it in one interface. Twitter just lets him post something simple and then link to his expansion on the subject. It's great, but Google needs to bake Blogger in with Plus and Reader, and allow people to post in any of those places, and anything that is posted to Public or a designated Circle goes on a page that can have a customizable, public facing template. It would be formidable competition to Tumblr, but most importantly, it would be a huge step towards consolidating our online thoughts. As much as I think that Circles fragments our lives, incorporating these products would actually allow Circles to do what it's supposed to do in the first...

There are two rule-type ways of thinking on processes and usability that I've come to believe very strongly in. The first rule is this: the more steps involved in a task, the higher the desire of the user has to be to finish it.  The second rule : if people aren't interested in learning something or lack incentive to learn it, they won't learn it, regardless of intelligence. I've been reminded of both these rules time and time again lately because of Google+'s Circles, which breaks both of these. To be clear, I'm not saying that to use Google+ requires a tech intelligence, or that people are going to reject it because they're lazy. I'm saying that to force users to make categorical decisions for every single person they add on Google+, and to then have to constantly mull over and edit those categories (rule one) when there isn't a compelling reason to do so (rule two) is ultimately going to cost them users.  Don't think of G...

One of the biggest advantages of social media-style communication is the ability for your audience to choose itself rather than for you to assume interests and choose the audience yourself, likely leaving out people that would be interested. Anyone who's started a blog knows the surprise in finding that the people who read it religiously are the people you never would have thought would be interested, while many of those people that you thought would read every word never look at it. Likewise with Facebook, where many of the people I interact with are old friends from the past who have turned out to be surprisingly funny and interesting, whereas closer friends are never to be heard from. The flip side of this is email, where every "To" box requires you to decide who your audience is. That's all fine and well when you just need to get through to one person, but when sending information to larger groups, how do you know you're not leaving out the people who...

You may have noticed (you definitely did not notice) that the layout of this site changed and it might even be noticeable that I changed back to Blogger. Why commit this SEO suicide and bombard my subscribers with old posts? Well, besides the laundry list of pros and cons, I can sum it up in a word: javascript. Posterous doesn't allow javascript in their templates, which I know makes sense from a security perspective, but it severely limits what you can put in the templates. No Google +1 button, no AddThis, no Disqus. You're limited just to whatever official features they offer, which at this point, are too limited. So it's back to Blogger, with it's massively aggravating template code, it's far-inferior layouts, its terrible 404 pages, its rarely-updated and old-fashioned interface, and its (shockingly) bad SEO. Honestly, I'd prefer to be on Tumblr, but I got used to posting via email, and posting to Tumblr via email is terrible. Finally, to the handful o...

I'm one of the many people who love last.fm . I love getting a view of my listening habits over the course of years, and I love being able to see what my friends have liked and have been listening to lately. There are things about last.fm that I would like to see changed/added, but it's a great site for music sharing. And in the days when it was active, I found that the wall page on Lala to be extremely useful: seeing what friends of mine had listened to and liked. Lala and last.fm got so close to creating the perfect simple music sharing site. Why is it so hard for Google, Apple and Amazon--companies with more than enough resources to finish the job--to give us something great? What people want from a social music site: To be able to share what their music statistics are (like last.fm ) To be able to see what their friends are listening to and liking What I'd love to see is a Facebook-wall type page that can either show only the songs that your friends have liked or show...

The tech blogs are all aBuzz (see what I did there?) about the first peek at Google's long-time-coming entry into the social field, Google Plus (or, as they awkwardly write it, "Google+"). Google is being smart here, and that's not a phrase I've used much in the last couple of years. They know that no one's going to abandon Facebook for something that's the more of the same except Google, so they seem to be just launching it almost in the background . That is, that they'll launch it, explain it, and then let people find the uses for it as it, rather than doing some massive product announcement/launch, which will lead to inevitable disappointment. Now, whether this can be a useful tool is anyone's guess. Their slick line of "We believe online sharing is broken" is right, or at least close. Social media is in a constant battle to stay interesting, accessible and understandable. It's possible that Google's Circles, Hangouts an...

My Google Music invite came through a couple of weeks ago. I'm not sure what took so long, since they surely would want an internet superstar like me who has ALMOST A DOZEN RSS SUBSCRIBERS to give it a whirl, but whatever. Google, ammiright? The short story of the pros: it's pretty slick for something that's playing from the cloud. The short story of the cons: it still falls well short of what I'm looking for in a cloud music player, which I could also say about Lala's old player, Amazon's and even what little I've seen of Apple's offering. I'm picky. Interface: The player itself is actually pretty nice. Songs play quickly and the view switches quickly. Usability is good and intuitive. I'm not sure how I feel about the orange overkill, but overall, the player is probably the smoothest that I've seen of any of the cloud music offerings. It's light years better than Lala's now-defunct player, but Amazon's player is pretty quick a...