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.”
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.
Wouldn’t it be nice if someone invented an automated Troll filter.
Ben, yeah, then the groupthink never need hear contrary opinions. Wouldn’t life just be grand?
Ben, yeah, then the groupthink never need hear contrary opinions. Wouldn’t life just be grand?
“Internet Connected Components” – Hey, Hey, I named that!
What is it with prominent bloggers needing to get an ego boost out of naming something?
This guy thought up a ridiculous name “Internet Connected Components” to describe the inclusion of data (eg. including google maps, adsense, a flickr bar etc.)…
I just recently did a google search and this showed up:
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=103427
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
)
I just recently did a google search and this showed up:
http://www.gartner.com/DisplayDocument?doc_cd=103427
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
)
Scoble Interview: Enterprise Mash-ups
I got the chance to sit down with Robert Scoble for 20 minutes last Friday. The thing that has puzzled me recently is whether mash-ups are for real, or just another Web 2.0 buzzword. So I asked Robert: Are mash-ups
[...] In this increasingly distributed world, websites need to become web services, spreading themselves right out to the edges of the network. In this case, the edge is largely made up of MySpace pages, social-networking sites and blogs. The widget, meanwhile, is the blog equivalent of the API – and the more you give away, the more you get back. (Incidentally, Scoble once referred to widgets as Internet Connected Components, raising some interesting discussions.) Flickr, YouTube, Stickam, del.icio.us, Revver and many more Web 2.0 players have successfully employed widgets to drive traffic back to their own sites. eBay and Amazon take the next step by incentivizing their widgets (you earn a % of any transaction). And finally there’s the widget to end all widgets: the indefatigable Google Adsense. Ultimately, I wonder whether we even need to drive traffic back to the originating site – it seems feasible to have all the interaction taking place within the widget itself (and in fact this already happens with Adsense). This is similar to Joseph Scott’s idea for API-only services, and you could argue that Stickam and Bunchball are getting pretty close. Nonetheless, you still need a centralized site where the user can create his widgets (or do you?). [...]
[...] I think Live Clipboard’s killer app is what Scoble calls Internet Connected Components (or ICCs). [...]
Internet Connected Components ? heheh
Internet Connected Components ? heheh
whats the meening of big ben i need to knoww its for a poject thats do today
whats the meening of big ben i need to knoww its for a poject thats do today