Skip to main content

Old VS. New

I was reading this article, and in it there were some really good points made. Those of us who have been around since the beginning of the web as we know it, have fond memories of pre-web 2.0 sites, that most don't know they existed or didn't care that much to look for them. The article points out Yahoo, which has re-invented itself to be more relevant in this post 2.0 world. One of the others that comes to my mind is AOL (or America On Line as it was called) Do you remember that in the late '90's AOL disks were everywhere. (The hay day of dial-ups) and for $13.00/month you had access to the internet at blazing 14.4 kbs speeds. AOL is another company that is re-inventing itself from an ISP to become a content provider. (Mostly by buying established content providers and putting them under the AOL umbrella.) Not that there is anything wrong with that. That is one of the many prerequisites when doing anything on the internet. Everything on the internet will either grow, change, or die. That is the nature of the internet.
Today there is nothing on the internet that is stagnant. and if there is it won't be there long. I think that may be another side effect of the internet is we have developed a very short attention span. If anything stays the same for too long it falls out of favor. (Remember MySpace?) FaceBook continues to update the site at fairly regular intervals, keeping them interesting. Think back, how many "Titans" of the '90s are still around? Anyone remember Alto Vista? or Lycos? Netscape? (to be fair Netscape is still around, but nowhere near what it was.) I guess the reason for my trip down memory lane is, every now and then I think it is just as important to look where we have been as it is to look where we are going. Remember, those who don't study history are doomed to repeat it.
What are some of the tech companies you used/liked that "went away" because they couldn't keep up with the times? Drop them in the comments.


Popular posts from this blog

Enterprise OS Thoughts

It has been a while since the WWDC keynote, and I have been mulling over this post. Let’s start with Yosemite. While Yosemite looks amazing, Apple is trying to get into the Enterprise space, and while the new OS is great-looking, enterprises want stability. Wouldn’t it make more sense to go back to the old model of creating a great OS, then when you come up with a new feature, bolt that onto the existing OS, That model worked for some time in both Windows and OS X. Then any new features were added through point upgrades or Service Packs in the Windows world.

In my opinion, enterprises would be well served using this method. It would give larger businesses time to roll out the OS, and would only have to roll out out updates that could be delivered via SUS or Remote Desktop. This is where both camps are ignoring enterprises and just racing to release another OS. in the last 4 years Apple has released Lion, Mountain Lion, Mavericks, and now Yosemite. At the same time Microsoft released V…

Bang into the walls…

I have been doing some reflecting on Steve Jobs quotes I came across. Everyone has seen the quotes “Here’s to the crazy ones…” or “I want to put a dent in the universe”. While both are great quotes, I think my favorite is: “When you grow up you tend to get told that the world is the way it is and your life is just to live your life and try not to bash into the walls too much…that’s a very limited life. Life can be much broader once you discover one simple fact—everything around you that you call life was made up by people that were no smarter than you…shake off this erroneous notion that life is there and you’re just going to live in it versus make your mark upon it. Once you learn that, you will never be the same again.”

This is basically what life is about. If you are afraid to “bang into the walls” you are not embracing life. What would have happened if “the crazy ones” would have not challenged the status quo? We would not have seen the genius of Rembrandt, Einstein or Jim Henso…

To the cloud?

Since the beginning of the computer age people have been striving for a more cost effective, safe way to save their respective bits to some medium for use later. At the start of my computing career, we used reel to reel tapes, which would eventually become cassette tapes when home computers came out. Then came the floppy disk. Starting at a whopping 8 inches then shrinking to 5 1/2 inches, before finally ending up at 3 1/2 inches. Which were nice and convenient to carry around in your pocket all the while being able to store an amazing amount of data, 1.44 MB’s and at that time could house multiple applications. However most cameras today don’t even take a single picture that small. So as always we bean to seek bigger and better as we always do. The next medium was the Compact Disc (CD for short). The CD could hold an earth shattering (at that time) amount of data 700 MB. So it took roughly 700 3 1/2 floppy disks to equal a single CD. Then came the DVD’s, coming in a single layer that…