Reading this post on the O’Reilly Mac Developer Center got me thinking about something we’re slowly falling into: web-service dependencies. Most new web applications are, in one way or the other, dependant on third parties, and the funny thing is noone seems to worry much.

Looking at the plethora of apps that use Google maps (and this is an example), is cause for concern. If google decided to drop support for Google maps, what would all the developers do? What would happen if Flickr decided to stop allowing people to use their photo database? What if?

Fact of the matter is, after service outsourcing and personal outsourcing, we’re seeing a new age of web-service outsourcing. One with no regulations - only expectations and hopes. Everything is based on trust, and trust sometimes fails. And the problem here is that even with web-services as a liability, there’s no fallback mechanisms, no alternative routes, no “competitor service” that can be plugged into an app in the timely manner live web 2.0 applications require.

This proves that purely mash-up based applications have small foundations, and like a house, with no foundations they may fail to resist should the unexpected happen. What will we do when services turn (if they do turn) greedy? How will we change if outsourced services change or close, since we’re seemingly so dependant?

A question for developers: Does your app depend on a third party service? Do you have an escape route or alternative? Should someone go crazy on a board meeting and decided to close a webservice you depend on, would you close doors? I would definitely love to hear some opinions on this subject.

There are a lot of posts out on the blogosphere arguing about what the best browsers are, how standards compliance is affecting new releases, whats hot and whats not. Now for tech people who know what web standards are and the differences between browsers, thats great. But for those who only care about seeing webpages, I’m not sure. This post will outline some of the current possible choices and hopefully give enough information so that (regular) people can make their own decisions on which browser to use.

If you’re a hardcore browser hacker or a standards advocate, this post may not be your cup of tea because of its simplicity - but I definitely want to know which browser you’re using and why, so make sure you leave a comment. The next few posts about bleeding edge compliance though may interest you, so keep an eye out.

Firefox (Windows, Mac, Linux)

Firefox from the Mozilla Foundation, is an exciting project. Despite the fact that the browser went through two other names before, its success is amazing. Due to its open-source nature, Firefox has a great community of people supporting it, extending it, and making it a great solution for standards-compliant web browsing. (more…)

So Mike just posted the scoop on Techcrunch that Flock will be launching today at 3pm. As a web lover (it’s actually how I make my living too), there’s a couple of things that I am concerned about with the release of a new browser - or if you want to be technical, a branch of an existing browser, Firefox.

Unification plays, for me, a major role in evolution of a product (or group of products) - in fact, I posted about this when this week I talked about Linux desktop efforts. It follows that a branch of a browser that’s just getting the right momentum (Firefox had their 100th million download just a couple of days ago) may not be the best way to get people to actually use any of the two.

Here’s the little flock intro by the team:

We started Flock to build tools that empower people and smooth out some of the more hairy parts of living and working online. As it is, we live and breathe this stuff everyday and wanted better tools to do the things that we love doing online.

Flock integrates the browser experience with social bookmarking and weblog posting. Now, as I’m potentially one of the persons who they’d consider to be in their target audience, I use delicious, flickr and weblog software like wordpress. Integration of tools that use this service into my browser of choice is a good thing, I admit, but why package that as a different browser and not a set of extensions for a browser that can use as many friends and supporters as it can?

Now, don’t get me wrong. I like the idea and the team, they’re great guys and really talented developers. But being 100% honest, I’m still not sure I’m changing my browser to have a way to integrate delicious and a blogging tool into my browsing experience. I know some people will, but I’m not sure about numbers. My only question is, how will development efforts for Flock influence development efforts for Firefox?

Apart from that and now that I’m done admiting my scepticism, best of luck with the launch, guys! I definitely want to see what’s coming next.

Update: Bart Decrem, the CEO at Flock, posted his view on the whole Flock / Firefox and closed-source / open-source deal over at his blog. You should read his post if you have questions about how and why Flock’s entering the browser marketing.

I finally am back to 0 unread items in my feed reader, after over a month of around 1500 new items a day. How? I unsubscribed from several feeds, and decided to take some hours reading, thinking and taking notes. But the whole process led me to think about something I’ve been meaning to write for a long time - too much information.

The problem with the web has always been the same for now over 10 years - more information than humans can manage. Solutions to this problem have come in what I call ages, and I believe we’ve seen 3 so far and are about to see another. Allow me to specify:

The directory / browse age

Happened from the early web days until let’s say 1995/96. The web had too much information for people to memorize. Even for a very small set of people using only a few pages, it was overhaul. Too many, too long urls that took too much time to write down, type and click. So, the solutions were directories of links, categorizing each page to make them readily available in an easy to manage form. Yahoo! was the most attractive approach to the problem at the time, and others followed.

The search age

From 1996 to 2003. The amount of pages with information increased so much that the directory paradigm wasn’t enough to acomodate all the data - search came along, waiving the need to remember any URLs, or any directory. You type in what you’re looking for and a search engine gives you the relevant resources. Cool.

The subscribe age

Late 2003 to the current date. People don’t want to search: people want content delivered to them - they want to subscribe. Subscribing to pages and information leads people to spend less time actually looking for information, and spend more time reading what they really want to read. Information delivered to your doorstep is the coup du jour.

The future?

For some, the future is here already. We’re seeing too much subscribed information. Again, too much data we can’t handle by ourselves (it seems data keeps running ahead of the human ability to deal with it). For me, the next couple of years will be about finding new solutions to this new problem imposed by the subscription era. We have too much information delivered to us - most of it, we probably don’t even care about.

Solutions need to be put in place that keep us away (again) from information overload. Because data will not stop showing up unless we relinquish control. What the next age will be called, I don’t know - but I definitely want a way to get the information I care about (and only that information), delivered to me automatically. A combination of search, filtering and subscription seems to be the key, but I’m still to see the ideal product emerge from these ingredients.

How do you manage your information? Do you see too much of it? What do you think the solution is to that now?