Back to the (Walled Wide) Web Future

From Walled Web to World Web and back again

Word from inside Wired is the magazine is prepping a cover story in which editor Chris Anderson declares that "the Web is Dead." At a magazine founded by digital utopians, that would be something close to sacrilege.

Anderson is expected to argue that more tightly controlled corners of the internet, especially iPad and iPhone apps, are gradually supplanting the open Web as means of publishing and online networking. The digital prognosticator isn't alone in seeing such a trend; author Jeff Jarvis has publicly fretted over the rise apps.

(i) In any newly emerging technology where lots of things are not clear, it is easier to design your own end to end experience until standard "subcomponents" arrive. Early motor cars had a dizzying array of different clutch/brake/accelerator arrangements and mechanism for example. Ditto AOL, CompuServe et al had to develop a lot of peviously non existent technologies themselves before Mosaic appeared.

(ii) Funders - especially early day ones - like Walled Worlds as it looks more like Protected IPR, it makes business cases easier (my Ad sales to my customers on my platforms). Typically the "Open" gambit is used by a large player left out or wanting to enter a closed environment (Think IBM in PCs, Google in Smartphones) or the Random Generoisit of a lare Reserach Budget (DARPA, Mosaic) entering a small market. Apple has shown Walled really works well if the customer actually buys their own iBrick in the Wall, which is the New New strategy in Walled Worlds.

(iii) "Open" requires a plethora of agreed standards, subcomponents, working practices and other collaborative things that takes time to arise. You can force it via "Open Source" innovation but there is always a catch up phase before it takes off (Android is only now starting to seriously take on the iPhone for example). It does eventually arise, but only eventually.