All Things Digital

If the defining characteristics of Web 2.0 are “groundbreaking” Facebook widgets, easy access to dumb capital and haughty start-ups dangerously over-leveraged on other companies’ assets what (or who) will define the Web 3.0 epoch?

The answer’s obvious isn’t it? Salesforce.com CEO Marc Benioff.

Why? Because he says so, that’s why.

Speaking at the company’s DreamForce Europe event, Benioff said that Web 3.0 will be the Platform-as-a-Service (PaaS) era. A fascinating definition–convenient too, since this is precisely the sort of business Salesforce.com (CRM) is in. “We think Web 3.0 is now upon us. It’s the era of platforms,” said Benioff. “New platforms are coming right out of the cloud. It’s time to make a choice. You can continue to build your applications in the software model or you can move your applications to the new model of cloud computing. There is a new way to build your applications.”

So Web 3.0 is not, as Tim Berners-Lee, inventor of the World Wide Web, once suggested, the semantic Web–”day-to-day mechanisms of trade, bureaucracy and our daily lives handled by machines talking to machines.” Rather, it’s Web 2.0 with another 1.0’s worth of marketing BS. The “Whatever-I-Say-It-Is Web”–the “Al Franken Decade” of the Internet age.

Well, the “me” decade is almost over, and good riddance, and far as I’m concerned. … That’s right. I believe we’re entering what I like to call the Al Franken Decade. Oh, for me, Al Franken, the ’80s will be pretty much the same as the ’70s. I’ll still be thinking of me, Al Franken. But for you, you’ll be thinking more about how things affect me, Al Franken. When you see a news report, you’ll be thinking, ‘I wonder what Al Franken thinks about this thing?’, ‘I wonder how this inflation thing is hurting Al Franken?’ And you women will be thinking, ‘What can I wear that will please Al Franken?’, or ‘What can I not wear?’ You know, I know a lot of you out there are thinking, ‘Why Al Franken?’ Well, because I thought of it, and I’m on TV, so I’ve already gotten the jump on you.”

Microsoft’s chief software architect Ray Ozzie has finally published the sequel to “The Internet Services Disruption,” the 2005 potboiler of a memo that charted Microsoft’s (MSFT) better-late-than-never software-as-a-service strategy. It’s called, intriguingly, “Services Strategy Update April 2008” and it describes in numbing detail Live Mesh, Microsoft’s ambitiously late entry into a rapidly growing cloud-computing market.

Live Mesh, though it takes Ozzie five pages to describe it, is essentially a “software-plus-services” platform that uses the Web to synchronize and share data among devices, applications and people (you’ll find a walk-through here and a good overview here).

“Over the past ten years, the PC era has given way to an era in which the Web is at the center of our experiences–experiences delivered not just through the browser but also through many different devices including PCs, phones, media players, game consoles, set-top boxes and televisions, cars, and more,” Ozzie writes. “It is our mission in this new era to create compelling, seamless experiences that combine the power of the Internet, with the magic of software, across a world of devices. … the Web is the hub of our social mesh and our device mesh.”

“The Web is the hub of our social mesh and our device mesh.”

Wait.

Does Bill Gates know that? Because last year he told CNN’s “American Morning,” “We’re making the PC the place where it all comes together.” Clearly, in the ensuing year, Gates and Microsoft noticed that Google (GOOG) et al. are fast shifting computational relevancy to the Web, away from the desktop and, more importantly, away from Microsoft.

Live Mesh, if it’s successful, will change that. Because, as Joe Wilcox notes over at Microsoft Watch, “Live Mesh is Microsoft’s attempt to turn operating system and proprietary services platforms into hubs that replace the Web. Microsoft is building a services-based operating system that transcends and extends Windows and also the function of Web browsers.” Adds Wilcox, “It’s bold, brilliant and downright scary.”

The ability to control how much information is available to the public has long been one of Facebook’s core principles. It was this very feature, for example, that Facebook used to distinguish itself from other social networks back when it first launched.

Of course, the ensuing years proved that protecting the privacy of its users was not exactly Facebook’s strong suit–especially when it came to digging up the advertising revenues necessary to justify its fantastical $15 billion valuation. There have been privacy issues with Facebook’s news-feed service, with its controversial Beacon advertising system, and with its terms of service, which granted popular applications access to far more personal user data than is necessary.

And now there’s another. A bug in permission restrictions in Facebook Groups allows members to upload content without first receiving permission from a Group admin. I know this firsthand, because over the past few days videos, photos and blog posts have been appearing on the All Things Digital Facebook Group, and neither Walt, Kara nor I–the only three people with admin privileges to the group–put them there (see screen below). Worse, while I was able to delete the photos and blog posts, I was unable to pull the videos off the page. There was no mechanism to remove them.

Worse still, the bug that makes this possible is not specific to the All Things Digital Facebook Group alone. It affects all Facebook Groups, site-wide.

We alerted Facebook to the issue and the company quickly identified the bug. Said spokesperson Brandee Barker: “Engineering has pushed out a fix that should go site wide shortly.”

UPDATE: Facebook engineers fixed the permissions bug, and we were able to remove the rogue videos from our page.

Investors who were chugging Milk of Magnesia in advance of Google’s (GOOG) quarterly earnings today were given a nice surprise this afternoon when the company posted solid profit and sales gains for the quarter.

Net income rose 31% on revenue growth of 42% from a year ago, exceeding Wall Street estimates. Overall paid clicks rose 20% in the quarter compared with the period a year earlier. That’s down from 30% growth of the previous quarter, but better much better than the forecasts of, ahem, certain third parties. “Our ongoing innovation in search, ads and apps helped drive healthy growth globally across our product lines, yielding another strong quarter for Google,” said Chief Executive Eric Schmidt. Apparently, the slowing U.S. economy hasn’t had much impact on the company’s business.

Shares of Google soared past the $500 mark in after-hours trading on the news. Seems the company’s historic run is far from over.

Comcast is apparently too busy drafting its “P2P Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” to bother attending the daylong hearing into its dubious “network management” practices. An odd decision for a company so intent on “clarifying” the practices ISPs should use to manage P2P applications running on their networks. But according to a company spokesperson, Comcast (CMCSA) “felt the issues specific to us were well covered at the first hearing, and the focus of this event should be broader than any individual company’s issues.”

Broader issues? Like reasonable network-management practices? The responsibility to deliver traffic fairly? Service disclosures? The sort of issues that might figure prominently in a “P2P Bill of Rights?”

Guess not.

Anyway, Comcast has already scrapped its policy of deliberately slowing some traffic flowing over BitTorrent and other P2P networks, so there’s really no need for Federal Communications Commission Chairman Kevin Martin to bust its chops anymore. As Mitch Bowling, Comcast’s senior vice president and general manger of its Internet service, told the New York Times, Comcast’s new policy is to slow traffic based on usage pattern, not application. “[Our new technique] will be based purely on individual consumption by consumers,” Bowling said. “Anything in addition to that is outside the scope of what our network management goal is.”

So the company plans to throttle traffic to the customers that use the most bandwidth. Hmmm. I wonder who those might be? The folks who use the Internet for email and Web browsing or those who use it for downloading digital media?

“Windows is too monolithic.” So says Gartner (IT) analyst Michael Silver who, with colleague Neil MacDonald, told attendees of a Gartner-sponsored conference in Las Vegas that Microsoft’s (MSFT) ubiquitous operating system is “collapsing” under the weight of 20 years of legacy code.

Silver and MacDonald argued that the operating system’s evolution is hamstrung by a vast and unwieldy code base that hampers meaningful change. “This is a large part of the reason Windows Vista delivered primarily incremental improvements,” they said. “Most users do not understand the benefits of Windows Vista or do not see Vista as being better enough than Windows XP to make incurring the cost and pain of migration worthwhile.”

Ob-vious-ly. And?

“Windows as we know it must be replaced,” said the two.

OK. But replaced with what?

It should be replaced with a smaller OS, the two analysts said. A thinner, more robust, more modular OS. One that makes application development, support and, above all, the user experience easier, more pleasant. An elegant OS that encourages users to upgrade, rather than desperately cling to older versions.

You mean an OS like … like Mac OS X (AAPL)? Isn’t Microsoft already working on something like that?

Here’s a clever way of streamlining the acquisition process: Become a platform-as-a-service provider and encourage developers to create Web applications using your proprietary database and your APIs (application programming interfaces).

That seems to be what Google (GOOG) has done with App Engine, a new service for developers who’d like to write and run their Web applications on the company’s infrastructure. With App Engine developers can establish their own little Google Labs outposts, building Google-friendly applications using Google’s own building blocks on the Google File System and Google will handle the scaling and fail-over issues.

That’s a compelling proposition–assuming you want Google to control your entire end-to-end development environment. And who wouldn’t these days? What better way to pique the search giant’s acquisitive interests than building a great big Web 2.0 sandcastle in its very own Web 2.0 sandbox? Who knows, you may be the next YouTube or, at the very least, the next Zingku or Jaiku. And if it turns out that you are, how convenient would it be for Google to acquire you, as Dave Winer noted a while back at Scripting News:

How much would it be worth to buy companies without having to transition their technology to their platform? There would be no retraining either, all the programmers in the companies they acquire would know how to work in the environment. Further, can you imagine that they’d charge universities to teach comp sci using their cloud?

“Given the cost of acquisitons, recruiting and training they can afford to blow a lot of money on free bandwidth, storage and CPU to make the buying and hiring process more efficient and increase the hit rate (the percentage of programmers who work out).”

It’s a Comcastic day for BitTorrent. This morning the cable provider, under fire for degrading the performance of the peer-to-peer file-sharing service on its broadband network, announced plans to develop better ways to manage peer-to-peer traffic. To that end, Comcast (CMCSA) will work with BitTorrent to develop a network capacity-management technique that is protocol agnostic.

Said Tony Werner, Comcast’s chief technology officer, “This new architecture would enable many new and emerging applications and will be based upon an open, nondiscriminatory framework that could interface with or support multiple technologies. We believe that P2P technology has matured as an enabler for legal content distribution, so we need to have an architecture that can support it with techniques that work over all networks.”

Of course you do. You just didn’t realize it until FCC Chairman Kevin Martin pointed it out, right?

Anyway, like most such corporately altruistic pledges, this one has the potential to do more good than bad–or more bad than good. “… We must recognize that these are two commercial entities whose goals are, in the end, to make sure that their networks and technologies are as profitable as possible,” writes Public Knowledge’s Jef Pearlman. “One can conceive of a world where an ISP and an application developer band together to make a proprietary system in which sanctioned application data gets preferred treatment, the ISP gets greater control of the application running on your computer, and both companies are happy in the exact situation we want to prevent. Time will tell what this partnership actually means.”

Oracle CEO Larry Ellison is a little lighter in the wallet today–about $2 billion lighter–thanks to a third quarter sales miss that sent the company’s shares down some 8% in after-hours trading.

Oracle (ORCL) posted a 30% increase in profits and a 21% increase in revenue, both in line with expectations. But a 16% rise in sales of new software that came in on the low end of its January forecast spooked investors who believed Oracle to be immune to the economic slowdown.

“A lot of investors had bought the stock in anticipation of a strong quarter,” said Avian Securities analyst Jeff Gaggin. “The applications business was definitely disappointing.”

With Microsoft’s (MSFT) hostile bid looking more and more like an inevitability, Yahoo (YHOO) has apparently decided it’s got nothing to lose by joining Google’s (GOOG) “Everybody-But-Facebook Coalition.”

This morning the company threw its support behind OpenSocial–a Google-led initiative to foster interoperability between social applications–and with MySpace (NWS) and Google, it announced the OpenSocial Foundation, a nonprofit dedicated to the mitigation of perceptions that Google will use OpenSocial for its own benefit.

“… Today … we’ve joined forces with Google and MySpace to create the OpenSocial Foundation, and will also begin supporting the OpenSocial standard,” Yahoo VP of Platforms Wade Chambers said in a post to Yahoo Anecdotal. “Industry consortiums such as this often start slowly and evolve over time. So far, OpenSocial is rapidly growing and adapting, but still in the early stages. We feel that this is the right step at this stage in its evolution. It’s no longer a trial balloon–it’s for real. We are taking this opportunity to help ensure Web sites and developers feel confident using OpenSocial as the building blocks for their new social apps.”