Changes to Google services I'd like to see

As a big Google-fan, I spend a lot of time using and examining Google services. As a result of that, I like to say that I 'know' the Google products pretty well. Having read a lot of "Top xx things Google should change"-lists, I decided it was time to write my own.

Some of the features described below might never become reality, however, I believe that most of the 'wanna-haves' mentioned below will actually be implemented at one point/form or another in a not to distant future (I hope they will ;-) ).

Let's get going then.

1. Add extensions (add-ons) to Google Chrome
   Like a lot of tech savy people, I've been reading a lot about Google Chrome (and it's open source cousin Chromium) lately; and tried I it out myself for a couple of days. Although that I really like the chrome-experience (that is, it is ultra-fast and really focuses on browsing), the one thing that I really (!) miss in Chrome are extensions. I truly believe Chrome's success depends on how Google will be able to address the extensibility issue.
   Add-ons is one of the key things that made Firefox to what it is today.
   If Googles Chrome team is smart (and we all know they are); they'll build their extension-framework in such a way that existing Firefox extensions can be used within Chrome with minimal (or no) code-adjustments. In other words, I think they should use the existing XPI-model and try to standardize it even more. Doing so will improve cross-browser extension compatibility and will make Chromium a compelling browser from day one.
   
   
2. Add more file types to Google docs.
   As a heavy google docs user, I'd really like to see Google docs support more filetypes (currently only documents, spreadsheets, presentations and pdf's are supported. Images on it's way ?). The concept of having unlimited, omni-present (as in being able to access it from everywhere at any moment) online file storage isn't just an idea anymore. Projects as Dropbox have already proven that (btw, Dropbox should be good acquisition for google).
   I do understand that there are some copyright-difficulties to cope with. E.g. users uploading and sharing entire books, movies or music files. Google can surely fix this. One possible solution is to restrict sharing to certain types of media (e.g. spreadsheets, documents). Another would be scanning the media for proprietary content (much like Youtubes "Claim your content" ).
   Online storage is of course only half the story; It would be nice if some of those files could be edited too. There are many websites that already provide such services for different media types. Once Google starts accepting more filetypes, it's probably only a matter of time before they start providing similar tools.
   Some noticeable online tools are: Snipshot, Photoshop online [image editing], devunity [code editing], monkeytex [latex editor] ,Google mashup editor, etc
   
   
3. Become an OpenID provider
   By now it is pretty clear that OpenID will become significantly important in the years to come. Most web developers at least know what it is by now (which was quite different 1 or 2 years ago). However, that can't be said of the average user. Although OpenID is used more often then ever before (list of some sites that support openID), it hasn't had it's big breakthrough, yet.
   If Google would become a real OpenID provider (and not 'yet another' through blogger),
   I would definitely use it on all of the sites that support OpenID authentication (primarily because my 'main', most important internet account is my Google account.) Google supporting and promoting OpenID could be the breakthrough (as in public acceptance) that OpenID needs at this moment.
   
   (For those of you that already like to use your Google account as an OpenID-profile: take a look at the following appspot [more info about appspots in general ])
   
   
4. Created a unified profile.
   Google has been working on a unified profile (=one profile across different google services) for a while now. It is still a work in progress though. Honestly, I don't really understand why this takes so much time. One would think that creating a general profile shouldn't cause real problems for a company as large as Google.
   Here are a few reasons why it might not be as easy as you may think:
   
   • Historical reasons (legacy code); as we all know, Google was a search engine first, and became a web service-provider later on. Services as Gmail and Google Docs were (are?) implemented independently. At the time of their conception, there wasn't a need the 'one profile to rule them all'. (Remember the time when you had to register/login for every Google service independently from each other ?). Combining services with totally different authentication models isn't easily achieved.
   • Uncertainty; Google hasn't made up it's mind yet. Does it want to become the next Facebook (Google social profile), or does it want to create genuine Internet profiles for their users (something like an Internet passport?). My guess is something in between ;)
     
   • Google wants to do it 'right' from the first time. To do that; they should become an OpenID provider first, and then create a decent profile-page.
   • They are secretly working on it ...
     
   
   
   
5. Drastically improve the iGoogle page.
   IGoogle is the Google version of personal portals as Netvibes and Pageflakes. Although it already has some nice features (gadgets, themes, etc); it really isn't very attractive yet. The new version of iGoogle (which basically only adds some layout changes compared to the current one), can easily be accessed by doing some javascript magic. The new layout is, to my opinion, definitely better than the current one; but I still feel like I'm missing some things. Although I like opening Gmail and Google Reader within iGoogle (this is one of the few other new features), they look awful in their 'included' form. They also lack basic features when included (e.g. view your feeds in Reader).
   Conclusion: Google should continue to work on the 'looks' of the personalized homepage, they should make it look <<sexy>>.
   
   
   
6. Continue to add nice extensions to the Gmail Lab.
   When the Gmail team announced they were introducing gmail labs , I was really enthusiastic. For those who don't know what gmail labs is: It basically allows you to add small extensions to Gmail such as different label colors, fixed font width, etc...
   Within time, the Gmail lab has the possibility to make Gmail the ultimate online (offline using Gears ?) e-mail application (although I feel like it's already the best web based email application available). Not only does it allow to customize your email experience (some features that I find useful might be very annoying to others), it also allows the Gmail-team to add much asked for features, without having to change the Gmail experience.
   Some features I like to see in Gmail are:
   
   • Themes (change the Gmail appearance)
   • Attachment Manager (easily search and manage your mail-attachments; would be EXTREMELY nice if this would be integrated in Google Docs).
   • To-Do list (including synchronization with portable devices through an existing standard)
     
   • ...
     
   
   
   
7. Create Google Maps for travelers
   Agreed, this feature sounds a bit cryptic. What I actually mean is that I'd like to see Maps add some options so that people can easily plan their trips using the service. Not only that, I would be nice if people could keep using the service while on the road. Concretely, this means offline support (using Google Gears); in other words, being able to view maps without being online. Building the technology to achieve this isn't that complex (given Gears). However, the amounts of data (=the actual maps) that would have to be downloaded to someones computer could potentially be enormous.
   This is a difficult problem to get rid of, due to high bandwidth costs.
   A possible (and logical) solution would be to limit the amount of data a user can download a week/month (e.g. 1 GB) without having to pay a fee. Ideally, the user would be able to determine if he wants to 'spend' his bandwidth on a larger area in a specific resolution, or a smaller region with 'zooming' options.
   After a while, already existing features such as route descriptions or searching could be included in this product. (And there are, of course, a lot of new features that can be thinked of.)
   
   (Note: I think this service is not likely to be added soon. But the concept still sounds great)
   
   
8. Improved Linux support
   As a big Linux fan/user (Linux Mint ftw), and of various Google applications, it would be nice to see some of the latest updates of Google software released for Linux. I know it's only a matter of time before Picasa 3.0 and Chrome will be released for Linux; but waiting for such great products is pretty hard. Don't get me wrong, I think it's amazing that Google actually does cross-platform releases for all (or for a lot) of their products. It would only be just that bit nicer if the releases were simultaneous.
   As opposed to picasa (which uses Wine to run), Google Chrome will run natively on Linux systems, which is always that little bit nicer.
   
   
9. Misc
   Besides the previously mentioned points, there are some other features I'd like to see implemented.
   
   • Improve protocol support for Google Talk (MSN ?), and general Google Talk experience.
   • Find a way to make users 'trust' Google with sensitive information. (E.g.: "Pay $5 a year and we guarantee that your information is safe. If your information is misused by us, or stolen by a third party, we will pay you $$$$".)
   • Add storage space to the Picasa web accounts (from 1 GB to 5GB ?)
     
   • ...
     

I realize that writing this article is primarily for my own enjoyment and won't get to much attention within the online community. If you did read the whole article, and have something to add, feel free to add a comment.

Please, do forgive me for my language mistakes.

People make technology work.

References
Google Chrome features
Google AppEngine
Googlesystem Blog
Official Google blog
Wikipedia

Web 2.0 needs a monopoly

I was chatting with Kurt (my colleague at digitalinfest) the other day and we started complaining about the things we don't like in this web2.0 environment. Don't get me wrong, web2.0 is lovely but there are some really annoying things about it.

One of it's biggest problems is a sort of compatibility issue, an ethic compatibility issue. There are a lot of social web2.0 services out there, primarily social networking services. All those services work in there own way and couldn't care less about connecting with other networks. That's a problem really, for example:

In Belgium the two largest social networks are Facebook and Netlog. I spoke to a South-American person a few weeks ago and he told me his name on Orkut, then a week later a met a guy from England and he gave me his meebo profile.

Do you see my problem? There is no way I'm going to make an account on all those social networks, but I would like to keep in touch with those people other than only sending them emails (IM is hard too 'cause there's a billion IM services out there).

To elliminate this problem that - I'm sure - many of us have been irritated with, I see two possible options: a big player with a monopoly or a system like openID that functions as a platform with basic profile information on which social networks can act as a sort of higher level layer.

A system like openID would be the most perfect solution I can imagine, but I think we all know that there's nobody out there willing to dedicate a whole serverfarm to a service that nobody will actually see and thus no end-user will care about.

So I turn to the other solution which is a lot more realistic, we need a big player in this market who can forge a strong monopoly so every single user in the world will be using that social network. I know the word monopoly sounds evil but look at it this way: How many railroad companies do you have? How many choices of services do you have when mailing a letter? One, and that's because it's the only way that works.

This post also concerns other web2.0 services like social news websites or services to get your photos online, I use Digg and Picasaweb but there are a lot of other commonly used services out there: Reddit, Yahoo Buzz, Flickr, photos on Windows Live Spaces, ...

So what's my conclusion? I think it would be better for the end-user to have one service provider for every specific service such as social networks, photos, social news sites, instant messaging, ...
This might sound rather strange because normally an end-user benefits when there is hard competition which pushes companies to deliver better 'stuff' to the consumer. But that's not the point here, the point in social services on the web is that you can connect with each other.

VOIP, the way to call whenever,wherever!

VOIP (Voice-over-Internet Protocol) will be having it's major breakthrough not far from now; because the only thing you really need is a stable broadband connection with the desired speed,.. to support internet telephony with some quality of service. In good conditions it is no longer noticeable that you're making a call over the internet. So landlines are becoming superfluous, particulary because they are more expensive.

Of course there is the wellknown tool: Skype, with this softphone (software program that let's you make phone calls) you can call other Skype users for free. It also offers attractive rates for calls to landlines or mobile phones and even a monthly fee so you can call unlimited (available in the US for about 3 bucks a month). And this technology is mobile too, especially when mobile phones (e.g. Iphone 3G) are connected to the internet through a relatively fast internet connection (3G or wifi); if this is the case you're able to make VOIP calls wherever you are. So it's a good thing for VOIP that such wireless networks are expanding and will have a great coverage in the near future.

It's understandable if you don't like to make calls with your computer using a headset,... and don't want to start your computer whenever you'd like to call someone (or have to leave your computer on just to be reachable). Therefore there exist phones that only have to be connected with a router. This phones support a protocol: Skype (Skype has it's own protocol) and/or the alternative Session Initiation Protocol (SIP). So while installing this phone (e.g. Siemens Giggaset C470IP) you just provide your SIP (or Skype) account information and you're ready to make VOIP calls with a (cordless) phone whenever you want. Another thing that is often offered by providers is an adapter so your current telephone can be used to make calls over the internet (e.g. Vonage V-portal).

There are a lot of SIP tools available, but my favorite one is Voipcheap. You just create an account, download the application and are ready to start making calls: so you can call other Voipcheap users and send SMS messages for free. In most countries it's free to make calls to landlines and in the US it's even free to call mobile phones. You'll think what's the catch, well the only thing you have to do is buy credit (10 euro) every 90 days to receive "freedays" (otherwise cheap ratings apply); this credit can be used to make non-free calls or you can use it to make your mobile calls by calling through a provided access number.

The only minor disadvantages opposed to an oldfashioned telephone line are that in case of a power failure you probably want be able to make any calls and when you call an emergency number it may not be routed to the nearest local emergency dispatch center. Also most services don't provide you a telephone number, so people can't reach you using their general phone, but it's possible to buy a number and connect it to your VOIP service. But we can conclude that if you want to pay less even when you start calling more it's time to switch to a VOIP service.

Lord Of The Rings Musical

The LOTR musical (www.lotr.com) is a big production that played already in Toronto for over a year,

and is currently running in London's "Theatre Royal Drury Lane" till July 19th. It will probably go to Germany after touring through Australia and New Zealand.
The show is produced and directed by Kevin Wallace and it's "Without doubt the most spectacular show in the West End (lastminute.com).

It's hard to believe how good they managed to bring such a big and great story to life on stage.
Of course some parts of the book are missing, but this should't surprise you (for example the battles aren't as present in this live show as they were in the movies), because they made one show in which they tell whole the LOTR story.
But this 3 hour long show is amazing as it is, it contains very good acting, in particular Gollum is played wonderful; the two voices, the way he moves, .... everything just feels right. The music score is great and also the costumes are surely noteworthy.

Before the show start some hobbits entertain you which is really fun, after that the use of some astonishing magical and special effects in the show becomes clear when Bilbo disappears from his party after putting on the One Ring. The show manages to take you right from the beginning with them on a journey through Middle Earth. So if you ever have the chance to see this production, I recommend to go see it.

PS: While you are in London don't forget to visit the Movieum (www.themovieum.com): a museum dedicated to films that shows you lots of movieprops, costumes, ...

Why Belgium sucks for us geeks

All belgian geeks know it, they think it, but they just don't say it enough:

This country sucks if you're a geek

There are 3 main reasons to say this: first of all there's the huge problem we have with our two major ISP's, they for some mystic reason think they need to limit our down and upload capacity. Reason number two is digital television: digital television in Belgium is delivered by - who would have guessed - the two ISP's. It is delivered in a non standard way and the cost is way to high. The last major frustration on my mind is the iPhone, while almost every geek in Europe will be able to buy this nifty gadget on July 11th, Belgians will have to wait till "date unknown".

ISP troubles

Years ago nobody would complain about ISP's limiting your bandwidth when you downloaded too much, but if you look at the plans ISP's in most countries offer, almost everything is unlimited. In Belgium things are different, the cost for a decent cable or ADSL connection are rather high and include a limit on the down and uploading you do.
The ISP that is responsible for internet connection over Cable is Telenet (also referred to as teleslut), telenet offers a plan that has a 10mbps down 256kbps up connection and has a limit of down- and uploading that's only 12GB a month. 12GB is nothing in this age of digital media.
Belgacom, the ISP that offers ADSL connections is doing even worse, the connection is a slow 4.4mbps down and I don't even want to talk about the upload speeds. In this case there's also a cap on the down- and uploads.
for years people have been complaining about these limitations and the price that is payed when you exceed them. Watching Quicktime HD trailers is not done because of this, downloading a lot of podcasts is just not possible because of this, and the list of frustrations caused by those silly limitations goes on.
there is an alternative though, there are smaller ISP's who offer unlimited connections for a reasonable amount of money but then again those services are less reliable and depend on the infrastructure of the two big ISP's.

Digital television

Analog cable television is getting old and the image you get on an LCD or plasma TV is just not what you want. Luckily there is a good new way of getting the broadcasted video on your nice flat television screen. Digital video broadcasting is the way of the future and in the USA it is allready widespread and has become a standard for almost every household.

In Belgium, things are - again - a bit different. First of all the way digital television is delivered to households is not done in a standards compliant way, everything is encrypted and you need a specific set top box made and sold solely by your provider. So you can already forget about a tuner card in your media center pc.

There are three providers who can offer you a way to watch this digital tv goodness but only one of them offers HD channels and it's only available in few parts of the country. Most households will use Telenet digital tv of Belgacom tv, this last one is far the worst. It uses the 4.4mbps ADSL connection to stream the video from its servers and this causes a lot of trouble with delays on the video or just a lot of downtime. Telenet is doing a better job but there's no HD content so what you get is a progressive image instead of the interlaced analog madness you normally get.

The worst thing that annoys me the most though is that it is all not standards compliant and that I can't use my own DTV tuner in my pc or the one that was built into my 50" plasma tv. I have to use an ugly designed cheap set-top box that adds another remote control to my collection.

iPhone 3G

When Steve Jobs announced the 3G iphone and I saw the name "Belgium" appear on one of his slides I was really happy, happy to know that by July 11th I would be able to go to a store and buy myself this long awaited over hyped gadget. But when I visited apple.be a few days later, the launch date had disappeared and Mobistar (the provider that will sell the iPhone in Belgium) had made clear that it would not ship the iPhone 3G on July 11th.
Suddenly Belgium was in the list that would be selling the device "later this year", together with countries like Botswana and Qatar.

Its a disappointment when you now all the countries surrounding you will be abl to enjoy the many features of the iPhone while you're still using a crappy ill-designed GSM.

Mobistar announced that on the 4th of July it would announce the date and the pricing of the long awaited iPhone, I'm looking forward to what they have to say but it should've been 11/07/08 !

Youtube Music Revelations '07

The age of music artists begging record labels for a contract is over,
now there is the internet so everyone can get there voice known all over the world thanks to youtube.com, etc.

Last year some artists had their breakthroughs: Esmee Denters, this 19-year old Dutch singer first became famous by using her sisters webcam to cover some famous songs, her number of subscribers kept growing.

Now Esmee already traveled all over the world after being offered a recording contract; she made some videos containing big stars like Justin Timberlake and she even opened for some of his concerts on his world tour. She made the cover of Billboard magazine and was a guest on Oprah, but we haven't heard the last of this girl yet, her debut album will be released this year.

links: http://www.esmeeworld.com/ or http://www.youtube.com/user/esmeedenters

Another girl that did very well last year is Kina Grannis, she's a bit more geeky: uses digg, twitter, facebook,... Aside from the internet she became famous by a contest "Crash the superbowl", which she won and got her a contract with a recording label.

On the internet she became famous by making the front page of digg with her youtube song 'Gotta Digg' (for which she was mentioned on 'Diggnation'); . She learned to play the guitar on her own, and she plays it amazingly good, so check her out on youtube.
A lot of her songs featured on youtube are her own songs, she's an amazing songwriter and a very nice girl who answers all your mails,comments, etc. and she sends out her own cd's (3 for 24 bucks). Now she starts to have concerts almost every week in the LA area. Hope she becomes even more famous and we'll get a chance to see her perform live.

links: http://www.kinagrannis.com/ or http://www.youtube.com/user/kinagrannis

Maybe I forgot to mention some really great youtube stars, so let me know in the comments; hope you become a fan of those 2 girls, like I did :)

Alternative names for Firefox 3

Firefox 3 is fast as lightning so I was thinking it deserves a better name.

"What about Thunderbird, ...
Oh right.
Well maybe just call it Lightning, ...
Oh right, damn!
What about Leopard, it's the fastest ani... wait a minute
Ok maybe Firefox is a good name after all"