The internet is swarming with public opinions about products and services. Smart companies consult various web sites and social networks in order to gather opinions about their products. Many companies then listen to their users, and proceed to make their products better.

The internet is like a vast focus group, with endless tips and opinions from consumers, free for the taking.

But how do you find the opinions that you're looking for?

Twitter is a good place to start. The micro-update format is perfect for quick, concise thoughts on just about any product or service. I constantly bitch about products on Twitter. :)

Smart companies find my update, and proceed to contact me with the hopes of resolving my issue, or perhaps to sway my opinion in a more positive direction.

Many large companies already use Twitter, in order to establish an instant support contact, or just to provide the "human touch."

• JetBlue
• Comcast
• VMware Fusion

Even smaller companies or independent product creators have some sort of Twitter presence, and simply use tools to track what people are saying on Twitter.

Twitter tracking tools

There's a few tools that you can use to track what people are saying on Twitter.

My favorite is Twitter tracking. Pick any phrase or keyword, and tell Twitter to keep you informed when any Twitter user mentions that phrase or keyword.

Another useful tool is Summize, which acts as a real-time Twitter search engine. Just type a phrase or keyword and instantly grab the latest results.

Both tools represent an extremely powerful concept, not only for companies wishing to track opinions about their products, but for anyone looking to get opinions on any topic!

Let's say, for example, I want to know what people think about the latest Death Cab for Cutie album.

The search at Summize gives me instant, real-time results. From there, I can grab the RSS feed and follow on my own accord.

If I were to use Twitter tracking, I'd get an SMS or IM notification for each tweet mentioning "Death Cab for Cutie." This is a great way to gather opinions, and even to find new people to follow on Twitter!

Getting opinions elsewhere

Twitter is certainly not the only place to gather opinions on certain topics. Just about any web site or social network that allows user input will almost definitely be littered with consumer rants or praise. You just have to know where to look.

Heck, even this very blog entry might receive feedback from a company representative from Twitter, Summize, or the site I mention below. All they are doing is tracking incoming links to their own sites.

One useful service that attempts to centralize public opinion is Get Satisfaction. It looks like a well-organized site for leaving feedback on certain products or services, but I find the overall intent to be presumptuous and ego-driven.

I believe you have to go where the customers are. You can't expect them to come to "your spot."

As a consumer, what if I don't want to sign up with Get Satisfaction? I already leave my opinions on Twitter and elsewhere, because it's easier for me. I shouldn't be forced to sign up with some site just to receive attention from a company.

You find me, not the other way around. I'm not going to go out of my way to find a company representative when something is wrong with their product. I'm already aggravated as it is.

Feedback

The deepest and most long-lived conundrum of web designers has always been comparing themselves to their "print" counterpart. Web designers and software developers understand that the web is not print, and print is not the web. Yet the two worlds often collide as designers and developers attempt to achieve the semblance that physical paper provides, with the flexibility and fluidity that we've come to expect on the web.

I don't know about you, but there's something about the standard newspaper that still forms an impression on me. Maybe it's the weight of holding something tangible, or the fresh nature of a just-unwrapped newspaper in the morning, and starting the day off right.

It's certainly not the ink smearing onto my fingers, nor having to walk to the end of the driveway on rainy mornings to pick up a soggy plastic bag.

It's also not the particular paper service (I've read the Chicago Tribune my whole life, but I also enjoy picking up just about any paper and perusing it).

I think it has something to do with a newspapers' size, portability, legibility, and flexibility.

That's why I am intrigued with new applications that attempt to mimic a newspaper's features on the computer screen.

The New York Times is releasing a Mac version of their Times Reader application, and another new Mac application, also called Times, gives RSS fanatics a new way to follow their favorite web content.

These two applications attempt to mimic a newspapers' legibility and layout. There's a certain appeal to how the eye scans headlines presented in newspaper format. Newspapers contain one element that web sites typically lack: typographical representation of information.

However, despite their best attempts to create digital newspapers, they are still missing three other key elements: size, portability, and flexibility.

Flexibility

A computer is a high-priced piece of equipment. You wouldn't want to spill coffee on it, crumple it between car seats, or use it to wipe windows. A newspaper can do all these things.

Portability

A computer is bulky and requires consistent battery recharging, and an iPhone-like device is too small to read lengthy articles. A newspaper is completely portable.

Size

Your average newspaper, when opened fully, is 30 inches wide, and requires two hands to hold. That's a lot of space, full of article goodness. That much content would require at least ten separate web page clicks.

Feedback

More and more social networks are providing cross-network auto posting support using API connections. In simpler terms, you can use one network to update another. The intention is to ease the burden of performing the same update in multiple spots.

With social networks comes ubiquity. Many services perform the same task (uploading videos, posting micro-content, etc), but each network strives to provide an overall better experience with different features or a more fine-tuned application.

So it makes sense to join more than one network that performs the same task, if only to experiment with what the service offers. Not to mention with each social network comes a different community of users to interact with. And since some users are part of your community in one network, but not another, why should they be excluded from viewing your content just because they aren't a part of all the same networks you are?

Knowing this, I see the logic behind cross-network auto posting - and that is, get your content out to all of your difference "audiences."

But there is a downside that's rarely considered. I spoke briefly about this in regards to Facebook's "Blog It" application, as well as my thoughts on FriendFeed.

As you prepare content for one network, and automatically stream it to a bunch of other networks, you are lessening your message intent because you are no longer taking advantage of each network's unique personality. Not only that, but for the few people that actually do follow you in many of those networks, they'll see your content multiple times.

Eventually your followers will begin to distrust your content, knowing that it's not being published by you directly, but rather copied over from some other realm.

After all, social networks are about people, not machines. I don't want to follow system updates - I want to follow updates from you! I want to know that you're sitting there, in some remote location, actually inserting the update. I want a person behind the update.

As soon as you distance yourself from each network you're a part of, you also distance your followers personal connection to you, thereby cheapening the overall value of the social network.

Your content loses it's realm, and only becomes a generic message passed across cyberspace.

Everyone loses.

Feedback

I often find myself revisiting albums from years ago, in an attempt to reconnect with old feelings or simply to enjoy the presence put forth on the album.

To be honest, I hadn't heard the entirety of Joan Osborne's 1995 effort, Relish, until recently. During 1995 to 1997, I had heard and taken a particular liking to standout track "One of Us." Now when I listen to it, I remember the times I was going through as a young lad, and relate the music to the events of my life at that time.

"One of Us" asks some poignant questions worth considering for anyone who ever questioned themselves, their faith, or the world around them. I always found the song remarkable in it's effort to establish confrontation, with a simple question that most people may have never considered in their fast-past, often blurry lives.

More importantly, the tone of "One of Us" is brilliant as Joan's voice soars above in her soft, yet inquisitive, fashion. The guitar riffs during the chorus are reminiscent of Neil Young, with deep, smooth-waving vibrations.

This post is not, however, only about "One of Us." The rest of the album is pretty damn impressive as well. Had I known better to overlook the "one hit wonder" status of the album, I would have listened to this a long time ago. After listening to the entire album, some would think "One of Us" doesn't seem as prominent as it once was, since the other songs are just as great, or better.

The beauty of music is that it's timeless. An album released 12 years ago can still form the same profound effect on listeners.

From the opening track "St. Theresa," Relish combines blues, country, soul, gospel, and even small hints of rock. The guitar riffs are amazing in some songs, if you listen closely for their subtlety.

This is what brings it home for me: Joan's beautiful, ascending voice combined with intelligent, charismatic instruments.

Relish is an impressive piece of work.

Feedback

Google Reader recently extended their "Share" feature, to include a short notation along with the item.

Ever since Reader's launch, I've always loved the basic "Share" feature. With one click or keyboard stroke, I instantly publish the link to my Shared Items stream. I use that page as a link blog, and embed the links on other sites, like this blog you're reading now.

The best part of the new "notation" feature is that it makes Google Reader's "Shared" feature more like delicious. I don't use delicious regularly, and I've been looking for a way to provide my own thoughts to items I share, which Google Reader previously lacked. This feature now meets those needs.

Extending your Shared Items stream

For those interested in parsing your Shared Items feed in order to display your items and notations on other sites, you can see an example of how I've done so on the front page of this site.

I currently don't have notations included, but if I want to, the notes are available in the feed. Here is an example node:

<gr:annotation>

    <content type="html">

        Testing the new "Share with note" feature of Google Reader.
        This kind of makes it like delicious - the ability to bookmark 
        something and provide a description with it.

    </content>

    <author gr:user-id="38946639871654532929" gr:profile-id="1424233330745740096912">

        <name>Matthom</name>

    </author>

</gr:annotation>

Each shared item includes this node, so you can obtain it and display it on your page alongside the shared link itself.

Feedback

When I mentioned my attempt to reduce dependency on the browser, Fluid hadn't yet been created.

Fluid turns web pages into desktop applications, or "Site Specific Browsers."

Rather than having multiple browser tabs open for each web app in use, Fluid isolates each web page by creating a separate application and process for it.

The benefits are as follows:

• Avoid browser crashes: one web app crashing won't affect others.
• Desktop response: each web app can take advantage of desktop features, like Command+Tab to switch applications, or Dock presence.

Fluid's tag line brings it all home:

Your web browser is for web browsing.

This is absolutely right. But over the last decade, web apps have become more prevalent, causing us to load each app in a single browser, which causes a poor user experience.

Using Fluid

Using Fluid is very easy. All you need is the URL of the web app you wish to convert to a desktop app.

Fluid then creates a separate OS X application, available for launching any time.

I have begun using Fluid regularly, but I have yet to determine if it actually increases my productivity.

Feedback

Brightkite allows you to post content in relation to your location. What this means is your update (text or photo) will inherit features of where you are.

Take, for example, the following Twitter update:

Wow that was a huge hit!

Unaware of the location that inspired this tweet, how would you know what the person is talking about?

Some would guess the person is at a baseball game. But they could be plenty of other places, including sitting on their couch watching the season premiere of a new television show.

Services like Brightkite and Fire Eagle provide geo-contextual information, which aids in understanding the nature of content.

Feedback

There is some concern that location-based services, like Brightkite, could be a haven for stalkers and ill-advised Google search results.

I can see the reason for the paranoia, but it's completely irrational. The arguments for publicly posting your location are the same arguments that arose when Twitter introduced publicly posting what you're doing. And that hasn't stopped hoards of people from using (and benefitting from) the service.

Brightkite makes it easy to update your location, but it's up to you how specific you make it.

For example, I never post the exact address of where I live or work. Instead, I just post the city, state, and zip.

For other places I visit, however, there is no reason why posting the exact address would come back and harm me. So Google knows where I work out, or where I have lunch. Big deal.

I want web services to know this information, in order to better inform me of people or places of interest.

In the government wanted, they could find out where you are anyway, with cell phones and GPS. This is a world where there's nowhere to hide. Get used to it.

Feedback

This is a brief insight into the mind of an active web content publisher. For those that wonder why am I so involved in the web, blogging, social networks, etc - this should provide a basic understanding.

The web is my life, but I'm not referring to the web as you may know it. As a web content publisher, I use blogging, Twitter, etc, to build my foundation for coming to conclusions and realizations in the real, physical world.

To understand web content publishers, you have to remove the notion that the web is just some resource used for email and research.

Active content publishers and social network enthusiasts consider the web as a much richer, far more vast environment with infinitely interesting people and ideas. Therefore, we put our lives on the web in the form of content, in order to expose ourselves as much as possible to these ideas and people.

Some would snide at using micro-blog tools like Twitter to post all of the mundane details of my daily life. Or personal blog posts about new ideas or concepts that interest me.

Such content updates, to me, is a form of nostalgia and self-enhancement. The act of writing helps formulate crystal clear ideas in my head, allowing me to think more clearly, and therefore act more effectively in the real world.

I imagine a future where I Twitter on my wedding day, the birth of my first child, and even during the tragic passing of loved ones.

I don't publish to exploit such sacred life events - I do it to enhance the nostalgia surrounding it.

To have such moments and times recorded forever is a wonderfully rich way to participate and reflect on life.

Feedback

At one point, I knew each of the people I followed on Twitter intimately. I could recite what they did yesterday, how they felt, and what was going on in their lives. My daily routine was more exciting having a close group of friends whom I "chatted" with on Twitter.

If someone didn't update in a few hours, I wondered where they were, and what they were up to.

This was when I followed 50-100 people.

My rate of following new people has continued on a steady pace, and now I'm following nearly 350. It's becoming too much for me to keep up with.

I refresh the Twitter home page a couple times an hour, during the day. This includes refreshes on the mobile Twitter site on my iPhone. Those that updated 5-10 minutes prior to my refresh, I'll see. Everyone else, however, takes a back seat. It's hard to remain informed by so many people, but at the same time, I want to constantly expand my network of contacts.

For me, Twitter has reached a saturation point. The intimacy of "knowing" a select group of people has become lost, and now I feel I'm just following a bunch of strangers. We're not "connected" like we once were.

RSS

I've resorted to using RSS to follow a select group of individuals that I want to keep an eye on, because there's just no way to "catch" their updates in the general stream of activity on a day/hour/minute basis.

RSS, however, is server delayed. Reading Twitter updates via RSS is like reading yesterday's newspaper. It loses that impulsive, live edge.

Notifications

Perhaps this is precisely why Twitter allows notifications to be sent to SMS or IM. You choose who you want to "monitor," and only those updates get sent to SMS or IM - in real time, as it happens.

In practice, the concept of Twitter notifications is not realistically scalable. If you have notifications set for more than 15 people, you'll quickly become overwhelmed and annoyed by the amount of incoming updates.

An enigma

This leaves Twitter in a state of an enigma - something that could be inherently useful, if there was some way to scale your abilities to maintain intimate exposure to each and every person you follow.

Humans can't scale like server farms. We only have limited capacity to absorb information to form meaningful, intimate relationships.

Feedback