Richard Giles

Back in the early eighties hackers found a way to do some amazing things with the home computer: the Commodore 64. A device with only 64K of memory now sounds hilarious, and you can’t imagine the limitations it must have imposed on software developers. But they found ways to do all sorts. Even add Sprites to the border of the screen, which was meant to be an impossible feat.

Maybe it had something to do with those limitations, but innovation abounded.

For many years I’ve said that the Commodore 64 was the best personal computer, ever. I firmly believed this, because the good old C64 was pushed well beyond its limits. Hackers every where did things to that tiny machine that no one would have thought possible.

But I think I’ve found it’s match: the Apple iPad. Call it a gut feel, but I think people are going to push this platform to its limit and beyond. Not only will people find innovative ways to use the iPad that just haven’t been considered, but I think we’ll see an amazing array of applications developed.

Sure, the iPad has it’s limitations, but that might just make developers push the boundaries just that little bit more.

Over the years a bunch of people have talked about a second generation Internet. People mean all sorts of things when they talk about it, ranging from a newly created network, to something that takes a new form.

I think the second Internet has finally arrived.

Through two Internet booms (or bubbles), we’ve learnt that monetising the digital world isn’t simple. The Internet is based on freedom, and trying to cash in on that type of model presents a whole range of problems. For that reason the Internet hasn’t really flourished like it can.

Don’t get me wrong. The Internet is amazing, and has come a long way, but most people can’t afford to dedicate time to something that isn’t likely to put food on the table. There are plenty of people that do, and places like Wikipedia and Flickr have grown because people make a hobby out of them. But people need to eat.

That’s why, love it or hate it, iTunes App Store could be the new model for the Internet. Thousands of people have started to create things on the Internet, and are making money. I’m sure most people won’t make a lot of money from their apps, but the business model is a lot more solid than expecting to make money from advertising.

The other reason I’m suggesting this is a new form of the Internet, is because when we use apps we’re at another level of abstraction away from the Internet. Sure, we’re using the same protocols, but we need to think less of the mechanisms, and just use the functions. Soon we won’t even need to worry about a web address.

Now I know this could be a worry, because we really don’t want to be locked in to a single vendor to use the Internet. Many have expressed their concern that using devices like the iPhone or iPad gives Apple far too much control. Perhaps it does. If everyone moved to these platforms for their use of the Internet, then it would give Apple unprecedented control over what we can see and do online. But that’s a whole other blog post.

In reality, what the app store has done, is change people’s expectations. Several years ago people wouldn’t pay to use an online service. They figured they’d find something else that was just as good and free. But today, people will pay a little for the convenience, and experience. People are more willing to pay to use something that provides them with what they want.

So although it’s not a perfect world, and we should all be cautious about vendor lock in, I think it’s a positive step forward. I hope it means that a raft of new Internet entrepreneurs and innovators make their mark on the new Internet.

Could Twitter be the world’s first widely spread private Internet protocol? And are we comfortable with a private company owning it?

Firstly, I love Twitter. I post pretty much daily, and enjoy reading and chatting to a bunch of people I’d never have met otherwise (hell, would I even know my sweatheart @lu_lu if it weren’t for Twitter).

But Twitter’s new annotations has me thinking (see Techcrunch’s An Early Look At Twitter Annotations Or, “Twannotations”).

I love the idea of annotations. I love data. The more the merrier. We can do so much more with Twitter when they add a feature that allows anyone to add extra metadata to a tweet.

The beauty of annotations is that Twitter opens itself up to becoming a protocol for all sorts of applications and devices. Imagine a TV with built in twitter to send a tweet with information about the show you’re watching. The annotation means the TV, or other applications, can show you what other people said about that television show, and could even display it across your television screen in real time.

Sounds cool. Well, I think so.

I love the idea of this. However, I worry that what Twitter is doing is trying to become an essential Internet Protocol. Just like the protocols that run email, or the web. The only difference is that Twitter owns the protocol. They can change it when they want. They see all of the data flowing in and out. And all this means we’ll rely on them, more and more, as more and more applications or devices build Twitter in.

I know a lot of people have been suggesting a decentralised version of Twitter for years. Darcy Laycock even wrote a great Twitter like application that worked on top of IRC (Kookaburra). I wonder if this might be a better way for us all to go.

I also wonder when we’ll all realised we’re locked in, and Twitter owns a large slab of the Internet.