I've noticed some blogs tend to release posts to the RSS feed before the content appears on the actual site.

Upon further reflection, maybe this is not actually the case, and instead it's just some weird bug with my feed reader, but either way - it leads me to an idea.

The way it happens now: content appears on the site first (naturally, via the local database), and a short time later, starts appearing in feed readers, which are usually a tad behind. What if we were to simply reverse this concept?

The RSS feed gets the content first, and then a short time later, the actual site displays the same content.

As a promotional tool, releasing the content to an RSS feed before the actual site has some possibilities.

You could promote your site's content in this manner, allowing "subscribers" to receive the content first.

"Be the first to know!"

I can imagine this idea being extended to products and advertising, and not just blogs or web sites.

The ideal audience for such a promotion would be people that don't use a feed reader to gather content. Because, let's face it - if you use a feed reader, you don't need a promotion to convince you to subscribe to the feed. You just know.

This could almost be extended as a promotion for feed readers themselves.

"By using a feed reader, you obtain the news and stories before they hit the site!"

Would such an idea be useful? I think so. RSS needs to gain more recognition amongst average web users, and not just for the technically-inclined.

This could be one way of promoting it.

Feedback

Here are the top posts from Matthom in June 2007.

• On being a Non-A-list blogger.
• Zoho Creator. Useful product, but if it could only reach into your own database - woah boy.
• Stop sharing things over email. I mean this nicely. It's so easy to start a blog these days.
• Email is for dinosaurs (or soon will be). Today's younger generation is not even using email.
• The Wonder Years on DVD: costly music licensing. A brief word on why this great television series has yet to hit the DVD section.
• Bulleted text: no more paragraphs!. This is a bad habit that bloggers need to avoid.

Feedback

In a recent appearance upgrade to Google Docs & Spreadsheets, folders were added.

But they don't behave like normal folders. They still behave like tags/labels, which were available in earlier versions of Google Docs.

This is causing some confusion amongst bloggers, who are proclaiming that "folders are back!" No, actually they're not back. This is just a guise.

Garett Rogers says:

Next, the whole folder structure is brand new. Strangely enough, Google abandoned the "tag" and completely replaced them with folders. Earlier today a friend of mine called me up to ask how to make folders in Google Docs - I'm betting there were a lot of people in that same boat and that's why it was changed.

Google Docs didn't abandon the tag - they simply changed the name. The concept is the same, and always has been.

The "folders" in Google Docs have every capability of a "tag" or "label," but with the appearance of a folder. That's it. They just made them look like folders, with little folder icons.

They're really tags.

"Real" folders

Folders have long been a part of operating systems and email clients. The concept of folders is familiar to everyone who's ever used a computer.

It's important to understand the distinction between folders, and tags/labels.

Behavior-wise, folders have one major drawback: You can only have one folder per item. For example, in Microsoft Outlook, I get an email from a family member, which I'd like to store in my "Family" folder. Simple enough.

However, what if that email also embodies a "Sports" topic? I also have a "Sports" folder. Ideally, that email should go in both the "Family" and the "Sports" folders.

You can't do this with most applications that allow you to utilize folders.

However, in Google Docs, you can do this. You can simply drag an item to many different folders. This makes organization much more fluent and intuitive.

Feedback

In a world of information overload, there's no prettier sight than an empty inbox. My goal is to always keep it that way.

Every email should be attacked. Either archive it or delete it.

More importantly, avoid giving out your email address unless absolutely necessary. This limits the amount of excess junk that finds its way to your inbox.

In the long run, I hope to only use email for business or professional correspondence. If I want to share things with friends, family, etc - I use a blog, or emerging technologies like SMS.

Related:

• Email is for dinosaurs (or soon will be).
• Stop sharing things over email.

Feedback

Why Daring Fireball is comment free.

Translation: feedback content is typically useless and irrelevant, degrading the quality, usability, and aesthetics of the site.

This is something I've also been considering for my personal blogs. Comments are not only a maintenance headache, but they often don't add any value. If I want to see random scribblings from random people (which I do), I'll look at Twitter, Pownce, Jaiku, etc.

This is not to say that all comments are useless. They're just useless from the blog author's perspective.

Feedback

The last few months for me have been all about pursuing social networks and aggregated technologies as a means to escape traditional communication and feedback mechanisms.

I discussed:

• Twitter: The Universal Blog.
• Email being stretched too thin.
• Blog comments don't serve a purpose.
• Feeds as content.
• Merging content.
• SMS integration.

The push we're starting to see on the web is less blog, less email, and more socnet (social network), SMS, RSS. Twitter, Tumblr, Pownce, Jaiku, Ning, Gleamd - we're adapting to a world of micro-blogging, with centralized portals where members actively feed off each other, using quick bursts of content, and fast message distribution.

Adapting to this new world can bring many benefits:

• New friends with similar interests.
• Ability to communicate at a new level with customers, building more flexible and trusting relationships.
• Influence users to consider a product or service.
• Instantly promote or market your own ideas to a wide, distributed audience.
• Become more informed and involved on a chosen topic or field.

Blogs, email, and traditional forms of communication are becoming less effective and less noticeable.

Distributed web presence

Instead of having one web site containing all of your information, individuals and companies are stretching their presence all over the web, in order to put content where it's more visible to the audience being targeted.

Resources and influences

• Vaspers on Twitter: "Socnet Specialist."
• Managing a distributed Web presence.

Feedback

If internet on the iPhone is not:

• A "watered down version" of the internet.
• The "mobile version" of the internet.
• The "kinda sorta looks like the internet" internet.

(Source: Apple.com TV ads - "Watered Down")

... then why are there sites being developed specifically for the iPhone? Sites that certainly appear like "mobile" sites, as we've been accustomed to seeing over the last few years, ie: m.mysite.com would be the mobile alternative.

This one, for example, is a random link share from a Twitter friend. I don't mean to pick on it, but it came to my attention as I was writing this post.

Notice on this "iPhone specific site":

• The narrow width (about 400 pixels wide).
• Limited images.
• Plain, easy-to-read text.

The intention was clearly to make viewing this site on the iPhone much easier.

But if the iPhone's internet is "just the internet," shouldn't any moderately standards-based site work just fine?

If I had to come up with reasons why there are "iPhone specific" sites being developed, I'd guess a few things:

• "Exclusively designed" to imitate the same "smoothness" that the iPhone interface presents.
• The smaller screen space makes scrolling more prominent, and developers love to limit scrolling.

No more "mobile versions"

In the long-run, I'd hope that internet-enabled devices will become strong enough to handle any web site, no matter how it is developed. Then we can finally stop having to make "mobile versions" of the same site.

The iPhone is certainly a step in the right direction.

Feedback

Lately I feel I need to associate this blog with a category or "genre" of classification, such as "tech news," "mac nerdery," etc.

This goes back to my ideas for blog slogans. The site name is almost not enough - you need to have a brief description as well, to let viewers know what you're site is about.

Funny thing is - when I stop to think of it, I can't really decide exactly what category this site would fall under.

It's a personal blog. I write about anything that comes to mind. I don't want to "classify" my site under a specific category, because then I feel that limits what I can write about in the future.

But I do tend to write more about certain things. Here is a short list of various topics I discuss:

• Web apps that change the way we communicate, work, or live.
• Desktop and web-based software that helps eliminate redundancy in our daily workflow.
• Tips and tutorials on web development techniques, unique software tricks, or general reviews on a service or application.
• Organizational skills that are needed in a digital world of databases, files, folders, etc.
• Metaphorical posts about achieving the right balance of "work" and "life."
• Musical tastes, interests, and personal instrumental recordings.
• Sports!

I'm sure there are dozens more topics, but this is what pops in my head at the moment.

As you can see, trying to narrow down my posts into one category is quite difficult.

This is why I've never had a description associated with this site.

Generic descriptions

I could add a generic, or broad description, such as:

"Open ended discussion about anything that pops into my head."

... but that's just lame. It's too broad. To the average viewer coming from Google, what does that description mean? Would that description make them want to subscribe to my RSS feeds for future updates? Probably not.

But "matthom" is arbitrary too. What does "matthom" mean? Absolutely nothing to the occasional visitor.

My personal profile as a technical person

This is why I've focused much of my energy on sites that I contribute to, such as Pain in the Tech. There, I have a defined role, and people coming to the site know that, as a contributing author, I write about technical things. Therefore, I'm enhancing my "personal profile" as a technical person - a technical writer. A "guru."

My blog doesn't really enhance that personal profile. It's kind of just a brain dump of thoughts and ideas.

I'm almost considering applying for a world-renowned technical site like ZDNet. There, as a contributing writer, I'd have a strong profile to others in the industry. If they see my name, they may think: "Oh, that's the guy who writes for ZDNet about Apple iPhones." (That's just an example. I don't want to write about iPhones.)

Either that, or we push Pain in the Tech to a more notable status, hire some new writers, and really make a strong impression in the tech industry.

My blog provides utmost freedom

Overall, I like my personal blog because it gives me the utmost freedom with:

• The topics I write about.
• The design and functionality of the site.

I wouldn't get this freedom as a contributing author on most sites. I'd be stuck in a template that behaves the way it was built. Future enhancements would require "upgrading" the template, and still you're stuck with what they give you.

Seems like I'm running in circles...

Feedback

On being a web technology guru:

You have to be cutting-edge, ruthless, willing to change or give up a common habit on a moment's inclination, with hardly any idea of what you're getting yourself into.

You're always on the search for that "ah ha!" moment. What can this do for you, and how can it make your life easier?

Always swim on the surface, but stick your head in pretty far. Never get too involved or fall in love with anything, but allow yourself to be changed by it. It is all temporary, but leaves a permanent legacy. Immerse yourself just enough to achieve the heightened sense of enlightenment and euphoria that comes with discovering something new.

Don't be a victim of "feature creep," ie: falling in love with a product or service that only gets "changed" and eventually discontinued or unsupported. Every new advancement may not be necessary, but it behooves you to examine every possible angle of the idea.

You don't work to do this. You do this so you don't have to work.

You don't change. You stay motivated or you get lazy, but you don't change.

Feedback

I used to care about following comment threads on other blog posts - especially responses to comments I've left. It was always exciting to see if someone, particularly the author of the post, responded to a comment I left.

Lately I just don't care.

Don't get me wrong - I leave comments all the time, but rather than constantly checking the site for updates to the comments, or following the thread via email or RSS, I've decided it's not worth the effort. It's just another avenue of information overload that I have to absorb.

These days, I leave the comment, and move on. Get in and get out. I don't care what people say in response. But it's not so much that I don't care - it's that I'm not trying to start a debate, or refute a point - I'm just dropping my thoughts, and moving on. Plain and simple.

Commenter vs. Author

This applies to me as a commenter, as well as an author. Since I author this blog, and a few others, I have the opportunity to respond to comments left by others.

Responding to comments as the author is not important to me either. Many comments are often criticism or constructive attacks on my viewpoint, and by all means - that's why I leave feedback open. Please say what you think. I am not always right - and I imagine I'm hardly ever right.

But I don't like having to refute my point in the feedback section. My point was made (in the blog post itself), and I am moving on. I appreciate all feedback, but if you're looking to start a debate with me in my feedback section, it just won't happen.

After all, this is my blog, and I can say what I please. If you don't like it, stop reading it. I don't mean to sound rude, but that's the truth. You have all the freedom in the world to start your own blog, and attack my viewpoints there. It's also probably much more productive on your part, rather than wasting your energy here.

Linking to your site with your comment

Most feedback systems allow you to include a URL, which is properly linked to, along with your comment.

As a commenter, I've decided it's not essential to link back to my site.

Many people do this in order to get a free link back to their site. This is how blog comment spam began.

Personally, as a commenter, I don't care if people click back to my site. I don't need the free link. If I write good content, I'll get the links through the natural order of things.

As an author, I appreciate feedback with URL's attached, but that doesn't mean I look at every site.

But by all means, leave your URL if you must. That's why my system allows it.

Related

• Commenting on blogs.
• Closing feedback on a blog entry.
• Why blog comments are useless.

Feedback

This is great. Check out "The Wrong Way" to post a video resume on CareerBuilder.

The example videos are worth a laugh.

My favorite is the guitar one, where he's interviewing for a Human Resources position, and sings, "You'll be my friend... with benefits."

Feedback

I've seen a lot of articles out that are analyzing Twitter: it's premise; it's impact as a social application, etc. Whether good or bad, they're missing the point.

The whole idea of Twitter is brevity, succinctness. Reading blog posts now is like reading books. And reading long and winding blog posts about Twitter is like washing your hands with mud. Kind of defeats the purpose, no?

Real Twitter users, ie: those that use it daily, and understand the impact of such an application, don't care for lengthy articles on the subject.

I don't want to read all that. I want terse thoughts; cumulative updates. Progress me; don't bombard me.

The value of blog posts

The value of a blog post still stands, but is waning drastically in the light of applications such as Twitter.

If you don't grab your reader's attention in the first sentence, you're likely going to lose them.

In a way, Twitter is forcing bloggers to write better; more succinctly; more clearly. Readers are no longer in it for extreme verbosity and endless dialogue.

I can see a world where all content is distributed in segments of 140 characters or less. It's all about engaging your attention without overloading you with details.

Feedback

Via Daring Fireball today:

You don't have a right to post your thoughts at the bottom of someone else's thoughts. That's not freedom of expression, that's an infringement on their freedom of expression. Get your own space, write compelling things, and if your ideas are smart, they'll be linked to, and Google will notice, and you'll move up in PageRank, and you'll have influence and your ideas will have power.

http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2007/07/20.html

My exact thoughts. From a few days ago:

• Leaving comments on other sites.
• Why blog comments are useless.

Feedback

Possible definition of a "blog":

A regularly updated, chronologically organized web site from an individual or group expressing opinions, ideas, or simply sharing information to a collective group of readers.

Notice: chronologically organized.

The most identifiable aspect of a blog is that it acts like a journal. It organizes posts one on top of the other, with the most recent post on top.

It also archives every entry, as if to form a historical essence; a sentimental value. Have you ever looked back at old blog entries, and felt a touch of nostalgia?

As the amount of blog posts increases, so does the amount of dynamic pages on your site - which can be navigated to find older entries. It's nice to have a search box that scans old entries to find the one you're looking for.

But who are we as bloggers? Are we in the nostalgia business? Are we in the archival, preservation business, like newspapers or magazines? Do we truly care if a post from four years ago is still accessible by local or external search engine queries?

I've looked at old blog posts and thought, "Who wrote that?" Obviously I know that I wrote it, but I was a different person back then.

This has led me to believe that preserving old blog entries is a waste of time (and space).

Rather, focus on your more recent, more relevant posts. Pick a handful... say ten, and display those on your site. Those ten can change, but only ten can remain. It's up to you to decide which posts exemplify your blog's meaning or personality.

This keeps your content fresh and relevant, and gives your blog more definition.

Feedback

Mike Davidson offers a unique way to keep your emails short - just let the recipient know your intentions.

This is a good idea, but it's something people should practice anyway.

More important than Mike's approach of abruptly ending your dialogue, or forcing people to accept your new approach, you should always practice "email terseness."

• Don't extend an email thread when you can close it.
• Don't send follow-up emails that are open-ended questions. This just causes the dreaded "back and forth" game.
• Don't force the recipient to have to respond. Try to resolve every reason for the email, before you reply. Then reply stating it's done.
• If you can obtain the answer another way, do so. Don't send an email inquiry just because you are lazy and don't feel like "looking something up."
• If you have to reply, give every possible piece of information. Anticipate the person asking further questions.

I treat emails like I do phone calls - it's an interruption, so if you have to do it, get to the point and get it done.

Related

• Bliss is an empty inbox.
• Don't plead in emails.
• Stop sharing things over email.

Feedback

I thought of an interesting conundrum the other day, involving my Google account.

Since I store a lot of valuable, personal information on my Google account, I decided to change my password.

I realized that if I ever forgot my Google password, I'd be locked out of all Google applications, such as Gmail, Google Notebook, Google Calendar, etc.

For convenience, I store my master passwords in a Google Notebook. However, that would do me no good if I forgot the very password to that notebook.

Also, if I tell Google I forgot my password, they'll send me it via email. But remember I can't get into Gmail, so what good would that do?

Turns out Google asks you for an alternate email address, presumably something outside of the Gmail realm.

OK. This won't work either, since I currently forward all of my "custom" email addresses to my Gmail account.

I bet you're starting to see the circle here...

Even if I could access an "alternate" email address, what's to stop someone from supplying their own email address for my account?

Let's test it

I decided to test the process, in order to see for myself how it works.

Logging out of my Google accounts session, I chose: "I cannot access my account."

I then picked; "I forgot my password."

I put in my Gmail account username, and hit Submit.

After inserting a CAPTCHA, I was presented with this message:

We've sent instructions to the secondary email address you provided during signup.

If you don't have a secondary email address, or if you no longer have access to that account, please try the "Forgot your password?" link again after five days. At that point, you'll be able to reset your password by answering the security question you provided when you created your account.

To prevent someone from trying to break into an account you're actively using, the security question is only used for account recovery after an account has been idle for five days. The Gmail team cannot waive the five day requirement or access your password under any circumstances.

If you're unable to answer your security question or access your secondary email account, we regret that the Gmail team cannot provide further assistance. If you're concerned about the security of your account, please visit our Security Center.

So you should probably make sure the secondary email address is active and accessible, outside of Gmail.

Still, this approach seems awfully insecure. The security question is the only thing between my data and a malicious person? Not a very comforting thought.

Isn't there a better way to achieve this kind of confirmation?

Related

A day after I wrote the draft to this post, I noticed this article fromm ZDNet, discussing secure email.

Feedback

I've discussed Twitter quite a bit recently, as it's become the outspoken center of my digital lifestyle - a hub for snappy, abbreviated, inquisitive content by myself and others.

Over the last few months, I've used the "favorites" feature to save favorite Twitter updates from others. I've accumulated around 50 individual favorites, as of today.

One way to get more of my close friends and family involved with Twitter is to allow them to see the real Twitter - the updates that really make you think or appreciate something so much more.

The value of Twitter is it's terseness. It's about explaining a lot with very few words. This beautiful contradiction (achieving a lot with only a little) has led to some interesting and thought-provoking posts by millions of users.

The best posts are those that convey a sense of wit, profoundness, irony, or just plain silliness.

Here is a brief collection of some of my favorite recent Twitter posts:

Observed while out and about: two women dressed in salad bikinis and a taxi dressed up as a shark. No obvious relationship between the two.

• jkottke.

That cookie didn't stand a chance.

• jasonsantamaria.

thinks it's time to leave when the homeless guy on the other side of the glass starts throwing D cell batteries and Tylenol into traffic.

• mezzoblue.

Showing you my Web 2.0, oh, oh face. Oh.

• jkottke.

Dreamed I was 1/2 size, riding a tiny motorcycle in endless ovals in my back yard while my biological father chased me. Paging Dr. Freud...

• fncll.

My neighbor just screamed bloody murder and ran out of her apartment, jumped in her car, and speed off. What the hell is going on?

• Pedal.

Wow, that burp was decidedly unladylike. Excuse me.

• Veronica.

Not sure if I can even textually describe the current tiredness factor. Not even sure if that statement makes sense.

• ijustine.

Twitters don't get Pownce. Bloggers don't get Twitter. Business executives don't get blogs. Consumers don't get why business is clueless.

• vaspers.

Try to makes sense of it all before trying to make cents from it all

• TheVerve.

Only explanation I can think of for that smell is that the clerk at the liquor store shit herself.

• gruber.

Never be afraid to try something new. Remember: Amateurs...built the ark. Professionals...built the Titanic

• twila_zoned.

taco bell gave me the complete wrong order but since everything at taco hell tastes the same, I'm cool with it.

• adamjackson.

Catch all of my Twitter favorites any time.

Feedback

The best blog posts are the ones that:

• Are fully researched.
• Contain near-perfect spelling and grammar. (This is not too hard to validate.)
• Do not contain too many links.
• Are descriptive, but not verbose.
• Have a descriptive title - no puns or "play on words."
• Do not contain too much arrogant self-expression. ("The other day I was chumming with my buddies at Microsoft...")
• Have a clearly defined subject matter.
• Have been experienced by the author. (Nothing speaks better than experience.)

Feedback

I've mentioned Google Docs ability to dynamically search your documents as you type:

Today I noticed a shortcoming with this.

Using the "find as you type" search box, you will only see documents that are showing in the main document box:

Notice the lower-right corner, it says: "Showing items 1-50 of 294."

This means that your "find as you type" search will only pull from those 50 documents.

Here's an example of a search for a document that is not part of the 1-50 documents currently listed:

The document with this phrase in the title exists, but it's not showing up in the dynamic search.

However, if I scroll down the main document list, displaying more documents, all of a sudden, my search query pulls results:

When in doubt, use the physical search button ("Search Docs") after you type in your query. Although it requires one more step, you'll get more accurate results.

Feedback

I've discussed why not to use feeds as content, and it's worth another post.

With more bloggers starting to use Twitter, Jaiku, Tumblr, etc - the option is available to import an external RSS feed as a method of creating new posts. I'm sure other services allow this too. I've noticed it on Facebook as well.

Although this may seem like a handy way to merge content, I firmly suggest not doing this, because it creates duplicate streams of the same content.

Your readers (followers, friends - whatever you want to call them) are responsible for managing your streams of content. It's not your job to "assist" them in this process. You're not assisting anyone. You're just repeating yourself, and aggravating your readers.

Keep your content relative to it's domain. Publish an RSS feed at that domain, and your readers will pick it up.

Your readers have tools at their disposal to help them manage lots of separate RSS feeds. For example, Yahoo! Pipes mashes feeds together into one larger, super feed. OpenKapow is a similar service that works along the same lines. If all else fails, their feed reader should allow some basic organizational techniques, such as using tags or folders to "group" similar feeds together.

The point is, as an author, don't worry about how your content is organized at the user-end. Just worry about publishing.

Feedback

I've discussed my process for uploading photos to Flickr, but I've recently changed my approach.

I used to take dozens of photos and upload the entirety all at once. The amount of steps involved became too much work.

Lately I've decided it's best to only upload the photos that I wish to share. Sharing is the purpose of Flickr, anyway. It's not meant to be an online backup for all of your photos. There are far better tools to use as online backups.

Using the Finder in Mac OS X, I keep all of my recent photos in a single folder, viewable as large thumbnails:

From the camera, they go in this folder, and then I manually select the ones that get uploaded. Not all photos are "share worthy," so I'll just leave those alone, or delete them. The better photos I'll tweak in an image-editing application, and upload individually to Flickr. Once I upload the image to Flickr, I apply a color label in the Finder to indicate that it's been uploaded. In this case, I use the color green.

I find this approach much more relaxing and obtainable. It's not such a burden every time I come home with a camera full of images. I don't feel like it's work.

I also don't need to upload right away. Sometimes I'll just dump the photos in the folder, and a week later I'll finally get around to cleaning them up and uploading.

Feedback

Google Notebook quietly implemented a text highlighting feature - something I've been awaiting for quite a while.

It's hard to believe this was missing before, in an application that acts as a "notebook," but better late than never.

Feedback

A lot of experienced Firefox users are aware of the about:config file that lets you adjust preferences and settings that you can't adjust through the normal preferences menu option.

Another way to customize things is to edit your Firefox "Profile".

Your profile is stored on your hard drive as .html, .txt, .css files, and much more. Below is a screenshot of the typical path to your Firefox Profile on Mac OS X (10.4.10):

One cool idea is to change the mouse pointer when you hover over links that open in a new window. This requires an adjustment to your userContent.css file, within your Profile folder.

Thanks Dan.

Feedback

The "Shared Items" feature of Google Reader is incredibly handy. However, Google is not doing enough with this data that they are obtaining from Reader users.

When I "share" an item in Google Reader, is this not my own way of promoting the item to a "Digg worthy" status?

Couldn't Google provide an interface that highlights the "most shared" items? With just that information, already you'd have a quasi-Digg application. This should be a simple algorithm for Google to provide.

From Scoble:

Google could put out a Digg-style killer that'd be a lot harder to game.

And what about other people's shared items? Not only could we see the "most shared," we could see who shared each item, providing us with new blogs and sites that we never knew about.

Notes

I got this idea from Scoble's article.

In that article, he is referring to a Facebook application that aggregates Google Reader Shared data from other Facebook users that are marked as friends. In his case, with over 3,000 friends, he must be getting some interesting results. However, for someone like me with only a handful of friends, the results won't be so hot.

Still, overall it's a great idea that could be implemented into the Google Reader interface itself.

Feedback