What do you call things like Flickr, Microsoft Gadgets, Google Maps, Amazon Affiliate parts?

by on November 7, 2005

I’ve been struggling to communicate with others what the new Internet ecosystem is made up of and it hit me a few minutes ago.

They are Internet Connected Components.

Hear me out.

When you go to Kayak Buzz or ZVents, what do you see? Two ICCs. One is a Google Map. Another is a AdSense bar.

When you go to Dave Winer’s blog, what do you see? One ICC. It’s the Community Directory on the right side that points to an OPML file somewhere else on the Internet.

When you go to Gabe Rivera’s blog, what do you see? One ICC. It’s the Memeorandum box that you can put on your own site.

When you go to Caterina Fake’s blog, what do you see? One ICC. It’s the Flickr bar to the right side of her blog.

When you go to Naked Conversations, our book blog, what do you see? Two ICCs. One from Amazon and one from Google.

Visit my blog here and you’ll see one ICC: FeedMap.

OK, that’s what I’m going to call these things from now on. What do you call them? Web Services doesn’t seem right. Web Parts, no, that’s what Microsoft calls Sharepoint things. JavaScript components? Hmmm, I guess they are. Gabe calls them “Widgets.” Nah, those have other contexts. Doesn’t OSX call their components for their desktop “widgets?”

Flickr calls them “bits” but you can’t search Google or MSN or Yahoo for “bits.” There’s hardly any listings at all for Internet Connected Components, though.

The Virtual Earth team calls its ICC a “MapControl.” Google’s map team doesn’t call them anything. You just call their API. Yahoo’s Map team just calls their ICC an API.

Microsoft is branding its Internet Connected Components as “Gadgets” and that’s OK, but I think we need a non-branded name to generically refer to these things. What do you think? What do you call them when you’re telling other Web developers about these objects? In fact, calling them Internet Connected Objects makes sense too (and there’s even fewer hits on Google and MSN for a search on that).

By the way, anyone have a directory of ICC’s?

Update: Ethan Stock calls them “rawpotatoes.”

  • Call them SIP's: Scoble Internet Programs. this way anyone who writes an app can pay you a royalty. Become rich scoble and screw this blog stuff....
  • Steven: heheh!
  • Robert, it'd be cool to be able to have the Microsoft gadgets "live" on a blog's sidebar.

    If it's "impossible", even starting by allowing people to add them to their MSN Spaces would be a nice place to start.

    Just an idea...

    Oh, and it's great that your commenting system doesn't go down like it used to now you're on wordpress.com :)
  • I've always called them "Web Toys". Not as erudite as "ICC" and certainly not as acronym-friendly, though. But to me, that's what they are. Either Web Toys or Web Goodies, and I love playing with them all. ;-)
  • Once our microformat is approved, it will be possible to build one. AOL's working on something along these lines (but, of course, called something else), and have developed a microformat to express the "component"-ness of them. See http://dev.lawver.net/modulet/profile for the profile, and http://microformats.org/wiki/widget-brainstorming for more information. We'll be releasing more information about the product that spurred the format in the near future.
  • What's wrong with "Widgets"? For me, 'widgets' are small 'things' which do whatever you'd imagine. Isn't this what you are talking about?

    As for "Doesn’t OSX call their components for their desktop “widgets?”". Yes they do, as does Konfabulator. Which was there first. They call them "Whatever you want it to be".

    It seems as if you're trying to come up with a new name for "foo bar". :-)
  • Caspar: easy, Google is too polluted to call them Widgets and have any hope of finding them. 20,500,000 results. Whew. And these are different than Konfabulator Widgets anyway. Apple Widgets only run in OSX. These things all run on Web sites/weblogs.
  • Oh God! YABA!

    "Web Toys" would actually make a nice acronym - WT's

    I like "Internet Connected Components" but the acronym, ICC, kinda clashes with "International Chamber of Commerce" which is regularly referred to as The ICC.

    There is also things like "The International Code Council" and "The Internet Chess Club" that use ICC as an acronym. We wouldn't want to confuse Internet Connected Components with Internet Chess tournaments now, would we?

    J#
  • I thought they was called Addons, unless I'm going crazy, which is not a good thing, because I'm not nuts, but I do like Planters.

    I like Web Toys to, because it's so cool, just it's not like monopoly.
  • scott
    These web components are all proprietary offerings. I'd keep calling them what their vendors want them referred as. The winner gets the naming rights. However, as these are all proprietary offerings, and the times have changed, I doubt any of them will get the traction needed to take on open source's reponse...whatever that might be.
  • How about we call them "Netplugs"?

    I did a Google search for "Netplugs" and only got 208 results, and Yahoo had only 90 results.
  • "Web Toys" are also polluted on Google and MSN. 76,100 results and they don't seem to have much to do with what I'm talking about here anyway.

    Scott: FeedMap isn't proprietary, neither is the one on Dave Winer's site.
  • Rockchild: Sounds as good as what I came up with.
  • hermes
    How about "us" as in user services. ICC sounds like something right out of a technical draft awaiting approval by a standards body.
  • Thanks scobleizer!

    I also did a check on MSN and got only 43 results for "Netplugs" which made me so happy, and my hamster Duckie, because he's smiling.
  • hermes: sounds nice, but I like "Netplugs" or "ICC" better. Why? 2,450,000 results come up for "user services" on Google.
  • The directory is http://programmableweb.com. It's got them all listed; all the APIs (ICCs?) and mashups, tagged and listed. Good blog too.
  • @Robert: True, Google doesn't know its widgets from 'the' widgets. But coming up with a new name probably is a temporary solution, as Google and MSN and Yahoo! will get 'polluted' very soon. ('ICC' or 'Internet Connected Components' each have some 15 million results already)

    So I don't know how to call these 'things' on your site/blog. Except for the natural generic term 'widgets'. Or maybe: 'maplets', 'flickrlets', 'gadglets', 'affiliatlets', '...' (brrrr...)
  • Scobleizer, I found a better name! How bout "Webplugs"?

    I did a Google search for "Webplugs" and only got 41 results, Yahooo had 9 results, and MSN got 4 results!
  • knick-knacks?

    I don't know - these services are just beginning to evolve. We're not there yet, in terms of putting them under the same umbrella.

    One key component which is missing, is the ability to migrate data off the web and onto my desktop.

    I think the next big step for these kinds of services, is finding a way to "encapsulate" data components - placing them in meta-data containers which can be moved from one device to another.

    Maybe it's a map component that I want to drag to my desktop, or email - or a search component that I'd like to organize among other search components - maybe link them and categorize them, and drag them to my mobile device - then drag them to my PC at work and refresh the underlying queries.

    Or maybe I want to take the components and add them to a document, or add documents to them - or tie my Flikr images to a Zvents/evite object and bundle with a map and a video teaser to create a funky multimedia invite for a new product I'm launching. So I spit this metadata container over the web or email and my Zvents gadget on my desktop starts filling up with RSVPs. Then I spit that gadget to my event organizer...

    Once Yahoo, Google, MSN, Technorati, Flikr, Gadgets components are *truly* portable then we can call them something special. Until then, they're just little knick-knacks chained to the internet.

    Gadgets has a distinct advantage here, I think.
  • Innocent Bystander
    So if people use lots of ICC's on their sites will we start referring to their pages as "ICC-ky"?
  • Blogdets?
  • Ethan Stock calls them "Rawpotatoes." I like that name.

    http://onotech.blogspot.com/2005_11_01_onotech_...
  • Scobleizer, do a search on "Webplugs" on Google, Yahoo, and MSN.
  • Rockchild: Webplugs is pretty good. 46 results on Google.
  • How about TONCAs - Things Only Nerds Care About

    :)
  • scott
    Robert: FeedMap is an API specific to it's application domain and not a component model. Dave Winer's formats *are* proprietary.

    BTW, If a name does not show up widely in search results, doesn't that indicate that the name might not be popular? I'm going to call them web components.
  • 9 results on Yahoo, 4 on MSN
  • Scott: when you're trying to find a name for something new you don't want to go with a popular name. Think of how Apple came up with "iPod." No one went around calling their music player that before.

    Or, how you now say you'll "Google" someone. We never did that before 1997.
  • Scott, I know I'm stupid, but I think the name "Webplugs" is not popular because it's not being used the way we could use it, so it gives us a chance to make it popular and take credit, but not credit cards.
  • I searched for "Web Components" and found 1,050,000 results on Google, even when using the quotes, and the problem is that that term refers to a whole lot of things other than what I'm talking about here.

    Scott: I understand, sorry I often confuse proprietary with "commercial." The APIs are proprietary, but these run on any Web browser that supports JavaScript and AJAX techniques.
  • Rockchild: agreed. We need a name like that that everyone will accept. I still like ICC's, but that's cause I'm a geek and every good technology needs a three letter acronymn. :-)
  • I'm not a geek, just a big fat kid, but I did a search for ICC's and got 6,050,000 results on Google, and just ICC got 13,600,000 results on Google.

    I just thought you should know.
  • Ok, I gota go, it's late where I'm at. My mom says I need my beauty sleep, but I'm nt a girl so I don't know what she's talking bout. Maybe she's going crazy!

    Goodnight Scobleizer, everybody!
  • Rockchild: good point. Now you're getting why finding a good name is hard.
  • Ops! Typo! Not a girl I ment to say, because I'm not!

    Goodnight, again!
  • Each time I see the 3 letters, ICC I keep reading it as International Cricket Council.

    Ok, maybe i'm watching too much cricket :P
  • Yesterday I saw a Cricket, but my big brother stepped on him.

    Ok, guess I'm going to sleeeep. Myy big brother got me in a sleeper hold, kinda hard to type.
  • I call them plug-ins.
  • portable connected components
  • http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=%22por...

    zero results on google :) although we're a year or two away from true portability
  • Matthew, sweet! It's not everyday you can find a term that has no results.
  • Steck
    How about "Wickets"?

    Definition: "A small window or opening, often fitted with glass or a grating." - http://www.answers.com/topic/wicket

    I see them as just another computer Window with a different context. Instead of the ability to open and close them, you have the ability to interact and control what they display [from the user's standpoint].

    If you want a metaphor, some of these Wickets can be displayed together to form a beautiful stained glass Window.
  • seems to be a cricket theme running through the last few posts...so, how about

    Sticky Wickets?

    Then we'd have StickyRank algorithms to measure how popular these things are relative to each other.

    StickyWickies is also another option.
  • Keith Patrick
    WGF: Windows Gadget Foundation...or more seriously (almost), Windows Control Foundation
  • Steck
    Robert,

    In the graphic design world, things called "Modules" are a recent development. In traditional layout design, such as a newspaper, you notice that the articles are layed out somewhere between 4 & 6 columns. This has proven to be the best and fastest way to convey the contents of a newspaper.

    In yearbooks and magazines, it has been discovered that the best and fastest way to deliver content to the eyes is not through feature articles, but through pictures and graphics [because people scan these mediums instead of concertedly reading them]. The problem becomes, how do you display more pictures and graphics in the same space if you only have 4-6 columns? The solution turned out to be to increase the number of columns to accomodate the content. With the increase to 8+ columns, some visual information spans more than one column, so these new Objects could not be called Columns if they varied in size and position. As a result of thier flexibilty, they became known as "Modules".

    Module: "A standardized, often interchangeable component of a system or construction that is designed for easy assembly or flexible use" - http://www.answers.com/modules

    That is why Popular Science [normally] has more pictures, polls, graphs, etc. than feature copy. (IMHO its as if Advertising is driving our information consumption habits.)

    I think this might best describe what you're searching for. Modules of infomation that are displayed together to allude to a bigger picture and stand strong on thier own.
  • Steck: hmmm, that's an interesting name: Internet Connected Modules. ICM has 4 million results, but "Internet Connected Modules" only has one on Google.
  • I propose "Web Components". Mostly because I want to hear all the geeks tell each other "You should check out my WC!" ;-)
  • Christopher Coulter
    Honestly enough with the buzzword-a-week'isms...take a walk, goto a movie, visit a park, read some literature...

    "You blokes look up tight. You should try logging off; it relieves tension" --Ray Tracer.
  • i call these sorts of services "web superservices" but then i like to think of things as super--what i really like about them is that they are global, so planetary superservices seems about right....

    could also call them superspecies---ecosystem metaphor..

    in any case i also very much like internet connected components...though i think it is also important that they are services, and that they have very simple interfaces that are open to an ever expanding community...

    ok, well, good topic in any case! best, jim
  • Distributed Web Bits, or Dweebs...?

    Search results here:

    http://blogs.msdn.com/alexbarn/archive/2005/11/...
  • I like modules too - just got done writing about that on my blog- because I think both portability and modularity are key components to the emerging business model.
  • Robert,
    Why "Internet Connected Modules" and not "Connected Internet Modules?" In quotes that has zero hits. Regardless of the specific name I think that in general these things would be one small part of the internet, thus internet modules, that are connected. Plus, I think CIM is a more approachable acronym to the non-geek than ICM. Mess around with the words a bit and you could get something more pronouncable.
  • Tricky.

    Blogdets sounds too much like blodgetts – of the Henry variety. Not a good set of resonances.

    Webplugs sounds like some kind of internet-connected sex toy. Probably something that already exists on some grotty little adult site somewhere.

    ICC and variations thereof is accurate, but not terribly memorable, descriptive or specific.

    "Thingies", "Widgets", "Gadgets" - all too generic.

    Ethan's "rawpotatoes" idea is attractive - although technically incorrect. His definition - "Why? Because they're what you mash up" is a bit off. You might grate raw potatoes for latkes or rosti, but if you were gunna mash up, you'd have to boil 'em

    I like "netules" - but that's already taken (http://www.davidmandel.com/Products/Netule.php)

    Plugules?

    Or ... ooh! Hang on - as these things are so very webby, and they work at pretty much the highest level of the Internet stack - how about "stacklets" :-)

    'k I'll shuddup now.
  • What about Modular Online Programs? That way, you get MOPs. How many MOPs do you have on your website?
  • In the Philippines, vestigial archipelagic thinking makes too many people regard these things as closed groups instead of open services. Thus, around here, I use the term "Web services" to counter that mentality.
  • I vote for WebWidgets (WW). Fits nicely with the WorldWideWeb (WWW)
    Display it as...WWW
  • How about "Weblets"?
  • I like Dweebs. "Wickets" works too (being that the ICC is the International Cricket Council and wickets are the focal point of th egame of cricket :)).

    How about jobbies? Little thing that does a job.
  • Steck
    How about DCM:
    Dynamically Connected Module(s)
    Dynamic Communication Module(s)

    Or DSM:
    Dynamic Search Module(s)

    Or just DM:
    Dynamic Module(s)

    I like the word "Dynamic" because it descibes the modules to a T!

    "Of or relating to energy or to objects in motion."
    "Characterized by continuous change, activity, or progress" - http://www.answers.com/dynamic

    But at the end of the day I vote for simplicity: just call it a "Module".

    People will understand that it is "connected" to the "internet" just by using it. I don't think those two words are necessary. In conversation, you can tell someone you have a calendar module, a map module and a Flickr module on your website. Same goes for the addition of Dynamic: a dynamic calendar module, a dynamic map module and a dynamic Flickr module. Easy.
  • ICC = International Cricket Council
    ICC = Internet Chamber of Commerce

    Let's not corrupt ICC! :)
  • Or use "wegets" for "web gadgets" or "web widgets"
  • I really don't care what they're called; the market will decide.

    The *catalog* of ICCs, however, is http://programmableweb.com. Loads of APIs and mashups listed, fully tagged up. Top site.
  • Ben
    Ooh I like Larry's "weblets"! Everyone knows that anything ending in a -let is supposed to be a little thing that drops in somewhere else. Applet, portlet, servlet, etc.

    Hmm crap, looks like it's already in use, including something from IBM that's web browser based but is heavier and uses Java also.

    Well i still would love to call them weblets. That little company can just change their product name or something.

    ICM has the advantage that it almost sounds like ICBM and ... uh ... they could be used intercontinentally? Erm.
  • Anything but another acronym. How about...

    weblets
    pagelets
    webbits (be vewwy vewwy quiet... we're hunting webbits)


    And I like netplugs or webplugs... cool.
  • Or (with toungue firmly in cheek) "ajaxlets", "applets 2.0", or "social softlets" ;-)
  • /pd
    Yeah jim moore has blogged about the ecosystem and called them "web super services" - I think we should term them that WSS thingy :)-

    I actually have flickr bar, wondair, googles ad box and I term them as "slap ons". I can slap them onto my blog and change the layout and content easily.
  • In a broader context, they would be mediaware
  • Alex Popov
    I know Ethan is calling them "rawpotatoes"- and I recently heard "RawTaters".. thats funny Bcuz my ex girlfriend told me if you blend potatoes in a blender at high speed it turns into a glue... maybe these guys know that too: http://www.suprglu.com/
  • Orbit
    useless bandwidth :)
  • jesus christ, they're stuff. who gives a toss what they're called? have you actually ever had a girlfriend mate?!?
  • Al
    Scoblets

    Named after their blogger

    ;)
  • no wonder ms software is so flakey if that's what it's employees spend their time musing over.
  • Al
    A few more suggestions:

    Jaxlets (they are not very asynchronous)
    Hacklets (as in hacked together web)
    Mashlets (as in mashed up)
    Mixlets (as usedfor remixing)
  • Wouldn't it be nice if someone invented an automated Troll filter.
  • Christopher Coulter
    Ben, yeah, then the groupthink never need hear contrary opinions. Wouldn't life just be grand?
  • Matt Stuhff
    I just recently did a google search and this showed up:
    http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=1...

    The article was written "19 December 2001"
    Here's the first paragraph:

    Internet-connected components will take business relationships to a new level of integration. Global-class computing and Web services architectures are driving this trend.

    Looks like we're all a little behind the times as far as whoever this guy was who wrote the article :o)
  • Internet Connected Components ? heheh :D
  • cheyenne
    whats the meening of big ben i need to knoww its for a poject thats do today
blog comments powered by Disqus