Jakob Nielsen says “don’t be like Scoble”

I just started my blog recently, I've already had people telling my I shouldn't do this and shouldn't do that. WTF! It's MY blog! I can darn well do what I want. I can talk about whatever I want. Isn't that what blogging is about?

If your blog isn't YOU, then why do it? What I LIKE about your blog, Robert, is that you're genuine. Those who constantly second-guess themselves or do what other people say they should do may as well go into PR and give up blogging, IMO.

Heheh, Jacob is something like Dvorak.

Irony - I love it...and there I was thinking that only Brits can do it! Rock on (as High MacLeod might say???)

"I wish I could tell you the truth about Jacob"

C'mon, throw us a morsel. Really. How bad was he?

Well, he does have a set of "high resolution pictures available for download." http://www.useit.com/jakob/photos/

But I have to say, for a guy who was touted as "the guru of Web page usability," it's shocking to look at that site. Must be the cobbler's child, because no way I'd hire someone who says they are in that business and then have a gobbledygook site like that.

I think this guy hired the designer of craigslist....

It would be a nice gesture to spell his name correctly.

Is vaguely suggesting that you have something bad to say about someone any better than saying it outright?

John: I fixed that.

Steven: of course not, which is why I did it that way. :-)

Anona: we don't rehire speakers if they get customers to complain.

I must be missing something. I don't see Scoble mentioned at all in Nielsen's article.

?????

I don't get it. Was this a personal attack? You're not mentioned in Nielson's post. It's not even really about bloggers like us -- it's for non-bloggers who blog.

You've also said recently that you're stepping back from the gotta-get-the-scoop rat race. I admire that position. Why withdraw from it?

With that post, Jacob is living in the - you make money from your content - rather than the Doc Searls mantra of - you make money "because" of your content. Whether the advice he gave his client is good or bad we can't tell without knowing more. But, most I would guess, even experts in their fields, would be better off with the latter.
-----
I get a kick out of this...
"they often say that they've wanted to attend for ages, and only recently secured their boss's approval to come"
Yep, takes about that long for the idiot that originally wanted to attend to be promoted to their level of incompetency (management) and having budget approval.

I think his website is pretty bad, yes, and especially his press photos (yikes - if you have children, keep them away from your monitor when viewing!) From his qualifications (despite how impressive they are!) its clear to me that he is clearly a Geek, and not a personality :o)

Rafe: he didn't name me personally, but he pretty clearly is telling people not to do a blog like the one I do.

And I first read this early this morning. I took a nap before posting this. I'm FAR from getting a scoop on this one.

I think the advice is horrible advice. Maybe I didn't make my case well for why it's bad advice. But I hate arguing with guys like this and with Andrew Keen. They are bombastic because they know it'll get guys like me to link and argue with their points, which will increase their authority/credibility.

It's a marketing technique, not a legitimate point. It's easily refuted by lots of big companies (and small) who've had great results with their "short and sweet" blog posts.

You mean your mom didn't teach you that? You had to get that from Woz?

Robert,

I think Nielson's advice is good for non-pro bloggers. What I get from the post (flawed though it is, but let's look beyond) is this: People read Scoble-type blogs and that's great. But telling businesspeople that there's another way to blog is important, because 1) it's true, 2) other types of blogs can be valuable, 3) many people cannot write short-and-sweet blogs, and worse, 4) many people don't know it and try anyway and their blogs suck and stress them out and drive potential readers away.

Ex: http://www.foundread.com/. Long posts. Good blog.

Jakob's summary states: "To demonstrate world-class expertise, avoid quickly written, shallow postings. Instead, invest your time in thorough, value-added content that attracts paying customers."

Sounds like good advise to me.

My mom hit me with a wooden spoon and yelled a lot. :-)

Steve: the problem with the advice is that it doesn't match with what most people want from businesses.

When I walk into a grocery store I don't want a treatise on the state of meat today. I want a quick "hello" and "we have a special on eggs on aisle four."

I enjoy long meaty posts as much as the next guy. But I also like the short little Twitters that people put up too.

There's a place for both.

Jakob is just playing us to remain on the attention radar. Well played!

How can a guy as popular as you are in this environment be so damn insecure?

Have to say, I agree with parts of Jakob's post. If there's anything I'm grateful for the rise of all these TwitterPownceyJaikyFace apps, it's that it lets me stash my own drivel other places and focus on writing more-- from what I've heard, it has worked. Even I feel like the quality of my posts have risen a bit and I've considered the next step... should I become a publication?

So from a pro-blogger perspective, I think there are some value in his words. And yes, my site is way prettier. :)

Shelley: my mom hit me with a wooden spoon and yelled at me a lot.

It takes a lot of security to poke fun at yourself and not take yourself as damn seriously as you seem to take me.

Eric: of course he has a point. But I notice that you use a variety of things to get your message across. Sometimes a simple Twitter message is all you need. No 4,000-word-whitepaper needed when all you wanted to say is "thank you" to a customer.

Scoble-

We all love you (oh so much)...

I read the original article, and it seems a bit self-absorbed of you to think it's about you at all. But you're right, Neilson is old school. If it were up to him, we'd all be like Yahoo 1998, or Google 2007.

Joe: "a bit self-absorbed." You mean a blogger being self-absorbed? Heheh. You MUST be kidding!

On the other hand, it takes the same personality trait to tell executives what to do.

If there ever was an example of your narcissism, this post is it. Not once does he mention you. Moreover, there's no evidence that he even knows who the hell you are. Yet you make his post about YOU. Unbelievable! But, not really. It's what narcissists do.

I love this comment about why he uses no graphics on his site: (http://www.useit.com/about/nographics.html)

"I am not a visual designer, so my graphics would look crummy anyway. Since this website is created by myself (and not by a multidisciplinary team as I always recommend for large sites) I didn't want to spend money to hire an artist."

What is so bad from hiring a (good) graphics designer?

LayZ: I'm not the only one who can link bait.

And, since my advice to corporate executives is to participate in the conversation, whether short or long, he absolutely was talking about me.

Hi,

I think it is a blogging technique to use your name to bring traffic to his site.

Whatever it is, I do learn things from you.

Also I did read your article in Fast Company July 2007
Thanks

"Steve: the problem with the advice is that it doesn’t match with what most people want from businesses.

When I walk into a grocery store I don’t want a treatise on the state of meat today. I want a quick “hello” and “we have a special on eggs on aisle four

Thorough, well thought out answers may not be what people want from most businesses, particularly the entertainment business, but it is what they want from experts.

Even at the grocery store, when I ask the butcher, "What meat is best with Pinot Noir?" I don't want her to point at the first thing in the case, or suggest that last thing she eat. I want her to think and provide a recommendation based on research and experience.

This is even more true when I consult a business, financial, legal, or medical expert. I don't want my doctor to fire me a Twitter saying, "Hey, I saw a great demo of this cancer drug while flying to Aruba on the Genetech airbus, so give it a try."

Ya'll know who Jakob Nielsen really is... right?

See this:

http://eisoft.com/blogs/.net/archive/2007/07/10...

The whole intarnets are about you!!!
You should blog about how that shark looked when you were leaping over it.

The right tool for the job.

Some are/want/best served by fast, facile, and often.

Others are/want/best served by deliberative, insightful, and comprehensive.

They’re different styles, suited to different needs in different situations.

So Nielsen is advising his clients, folks wanting to assert their mastery of a subject, to do the latter. To demonstrate their value by informing or instructing others in a way that showcases the author’s skills & knowledge. The payback comes`from being cited by others in the field, professional articles, leading to professional engagements.

So?

Is blogging the only means to an end? Must we all rely on blipverts or are treatises still appropriate in some situations?

Frankly Scoble you’re being a drama whore & the it’s-all-about-me bit is so strained as to be laughable.

Hi, Robert,

Clearly Jakob & you have 'history'. Must be the strain of your job - the normal tactic to follow is to ignore implied criticism. SO why did you take the 'bait'?

I like you - you're bound to get it right if you use a big enough shotgun. I like some of Jakob's stuff - much seems to be nit-picking but a lot is marketing 101 which web site creators seem too often to forget and Jakob's market is business.

Blogs have a place in business - you've clearly shown that to be true. Blogs rarely sell product, do raise awareness - sometimes. Not all blogs are worth following - 99+% are a waste of space except to the author and his/her intimates.

So why not agree to disagree and just keep quiet?

His site has design has been bad for the last 10 years at least. It wouldn't take much to improve it dramatically.

I think Matt Cutts has (for me) one of the best quality/length of blog ratios (sorry Robert). Having said that you do have a nice mixture.

I think it's more like Web 0.7, and I suppose he doesn't have comments because he fears being critizised (perhaps he's a very sensitive person ;-) ).

He just tries to compensate his bad site by denouncing other people that have much prettier websites (ok, i don't know why he chooses you then!?!? hehe)

go on like you do! (guess you would have without my advice, huh?)

Robert says: "No 4,000-word-whitepaper needed when all you wanted to say is “thank you” to a customer."

If you're just blogging a "thank you" to a customer, I wouldn't want to be your customer :)

But seriously, I don't know what the personal beef is between you and Jakob - there obviously is one, from the tone of what you're writing - but you're doing his article a disservice.

What Jakob is saying is simple: if you're an expert in your field, simply throwing a few "hand grenade" comments in isn't going to be enough to demonstrate that, and will not appreciably add to the conversation.

I read you because you point to lots of interesting things. I read others because they *write* lots of interesting things, quite often pretty long. That's not denigrating what you do, at all - you're probably the best linker on the planet - but what you do here only really demonstrates your expertise in reading blogs and picking out useful information. I have absolutely no idea, from what you blog, whether you have a lot of knowledge about the technical side of podcasting, video, or anything else that you do on a day-to-day basis. I'm sure you do - but you don't show it from what you write.

Blogging can be about anything that we can write about: saying "oh, it's all about THIS" is as silly as saying that books all have to be in a single format. But the conversation that blogging supports benefits from expertise, and expertise is very rarely simply enough to be expressed in a short post - unless you think that posts which say "I'm an expert, take my word for it" are enough.

Ignorance meets Ego.

So, Jakob Nielsen writes a post *not* about blogs, certainly not about this blog or you personally. On top of that ,he clearly states your *own main point* :
"For most sites, the content is not the point. Instead, you want to answer customers' questions as rapidly as possible so that they'll advance in the sales cycle and start buying (or donate, or sign up for your newsletter, or whatever else you want them to do)."
And furthermore
"Still, even if you run an expertise-driven site, you should follow the bulk of content usability guidelines: be as brief as you can;[...]"

And you still take time out to make it clear to everyone you think Jakob Nielsen is an idiot and completely miss the point of his post - all in order to put yourself at the center of some linkbait. You made us look, but, boy, what a sorry excuse for a blog post.

You just accomplished a feat that was heretofore believed to be impossible: You demonstrated that your ego is worse than Jobs, Ellison and Gates -- combined!!

You're just a blogger, like the rest of us. Better known, thanks to your former employer.

Nielsen was not talking about you. I've read a lot of his publications and there's not one hint that he's talking about you. So get over it. Really, you just proved to be one of the biggest assholes I've encountered among the A-bloggers: A-bloggers who think they're way more important than they really are. We all have our place; we're all important in our own way. Your importance is/will be as a father, NOT as a blogger or Web 2.0 self-anointed guru. Get over A-list blogger ego crap.

Maybe you're jealous because you're just a blogger and Nielsen has much better credentials. I don't know what it is, but you overreacted to Nielsen.

Too many A-list bloggers think they're the Messiah, that everyone else is clueless. You're wrong: Compare CVs, even when restricted to web-related activities, and a lot of us have helluva lot better credentials than you do.

I liked you -- until I read this post. We've argued before over at Micropersuasion, but when we met at AlwaysOn's Stanford event last year, I thought you were kind of charming. But your response to Nielsen -- and ANY notion that his article was about you -- is beyond absurdity. Maybe you should have stayed in your relatively junior position at Microsoft rather than being driven by your ego.

Take a break, man ...

BTW, I didn't write my comment at 3:57 am, as if I have nothing better to do. It's 6:58 pm right now in China.

History may judge us harshly, Robert. But let us take a stand against 2.0's community obsession, and be islands with some interesting hook-ups, eh?

"Well, I wish I could tell you the truth about Jacob (he worked for me back in the 1990s at one of our conferences — we never hired him again) but Steve Wozniak taught me to never say anything if I can’t say something nice about someone."

If you can't/don't want to tell the whole story, then don't hint about bad things. I don't want to know the story, but vauge hints and rumors are worse than the real story.

I think it was Mark Twain who wrote "I wrote you a long letter because I did not have the time to write a short one."
As a businessperson and blog reader, I really appreciate pithyness. If I want a long treatment of a subject, I'll read a New Yorker article or a book. (Currently Bo Burlingame's Small Giants.)

My favorite blogger is Marketing guru Seth Godin. His posts range from medium to very brief, and are always interesting, instructive, well-written, and personal.
EG: http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/07...
http://sethgodin.typepad.com/seths_blog/2007/07...

As a fairly new business blogger (not trying to make a penny) I'm aiming for a style like Seth's, which is not unlike Robert's, though Seth's always have a point.
I also like the inclusion of images: http://www.startupnation.com/blog/entry.asp?ENT...

"Oh, wait, he just wrote a post worthy of Valleywag or Fake Steve except he doesn’t have comments, doesn’t have trackbacks, and used about 2,000 words to say something a better writer would say in about 300 words."

LOL...you could be describing Thurrott or Gruber! I love them both, I really do, but OMG...sometimes less IS more.

Ha, that's funny Robert. I haven't ready any of Jacobs stuff in nearly 10 years.

Years back when I worked as a usability engineer on a large financial institutions web site I was forced to suffer through one of Jakobs conferences. Talk about full of himself, among other things he is full of. Typical web elitist. If it isn't done to his personal view of perfection it shouldn't be done at all. Luckily for the rest of us mere mortals the web and its use by the unwashed masses moves forward despite the discomfort it causes some.

You're so vain, I bet you think that post is about you...

Hmmmm. I think i need to write something bad about you. Seems to be a good way to get linked and getting a +1 in the google ranking ;)

But you could give yourself a "scoble-rank". just add a number after each posting you make that indicates how many "scoble-points" you did.


ps:
12. Do not post about iPhones like Scoble does.

I was going to read Jakob's post to better understand the context of your counter but I became terribly uninterested after the first paragraph.

I'm not getting in the middle of this particular food fight. Ah, hell... Yes I am! :)

Did you see where Marc Andreesen's closed comments on his pmarca blog (trackbacks for the last 20). I *LOVE* that Akismet has helped us to keep comments open when and where we want to. I wouldn't blog if it weren't for solutions like theirs. Wonder how closing comments helps/hurts rocket-propelled people like Dr. Schwartz, Messrs. Andreesen, Cuban, Kawasaki, Godin? Their blogs... still, it seems to be making a gesture at those who would comment/contribute. (I'll talk at you, dispensing wisdom from the mountain top. But, don't you try to annoy me padewan.) Could we coax a rehash out of you on that one?

@David Scott Lewis - Forgive me but having critiqued Scoble on the grounds of ego, you put up a second post just to let know that you're posting from China?!?
Anyway, if ego was a crime, we'd all be strung up.
@Scoble - one of the things I love about your blog is the shoot-from-the-hip quotient but really, trying to start a flame war with Nielsen?

I find it hilarious that this summary: "To demonstrate world-class expertise, avoid quickly written, shallow postings. Instead, invest your time in thorough, value-added content that attracts paying customers." is really all he needs, a perfect tweet... The fact that Nielsen would then go on for thousands of words talking it all to death just wreaks of self-aggrandizing narcissism, so much for brevity in his thesis. It's rare Mr. Scoble, but damn I agree with you on this one!

As a web user and a blogger, I have only one thing to say:

If you want to know how NOT to design your website for usability and user-friendliness, see the Guru Jakob Nielsen's own website: http://www.useit.com/

I regret the day I spent money on his book which arguably is better packaged than the website itself.

This I love:

"... and used about 2,000 words to say something a better writer would say in about 300 words."

Straight out of Strunk and White - "The Elements of Style" which sits on my desk and says things like:

"Omit needless words"

When he could have said "Use no unnecessary words."

... A 25% savings.

I generally agree with his Jakob's analysis. I've not found one blogger that is worth reading all the time. At most their are only a few worthwhile posts per week. What's the point of wasting my life reading through all the BS?

You are totally overreacting here. Did he even mention you in the post?

control+f on the term "scoble"

On his page turns up nothing.
http://mashable.com/2007/04/21/web-startups-and...

I find that this article is more true to life when describing most A-list bloggers. It would seem like the more grandiose and disjoint one is from reality, the better they are at blogging.
Sort of like if they say something has value, it is now valuable, because they said so.
I pity the people who take them seriously.

I thought trolling was reserved for comments and message boards, rather than full on blog postings. I hate reading the response on blogs from people who dare to criticise the way bloggers do things. It's never done with any intelligence or grace, or any interest in discovering whether the contrary opinion holds any truth. (A life rule I hold strongly to is that if someone can completely disagree with you, then it's almost certain there is some truth in what they believe and some false in what you believe, and that you service yourself by seeking both out.)

It's always a knee-jerk "no your mum!" response, just like this post. It's like a school playground for adults.

Gosh Scoble,

Maybe fake Steve Jobs is right; maybe you are resorting to increasingly desperate measures to stay relevant in your post Microsoft career.

Seriously, it would have been better to blog a response disputing Nielsen's article instead of taking a hissy fit and making veiled jabs at why you wouldnt hire him again.

Nielsen 1, Scoble 0.

George: of course Nielsen's rant holds some truth. So does Keen's. The problem is both of these guys are bombasts for marketing reasons. Keen's editor actually stripped out any balance from his book so that it would "sell" better.

I figure if it's good for them, might be good for me too. :-)

Mark: you assume I actually had any relevance at Microsoft in the first place. Thank you, but I think it was over hyped.

Wow, man. You really know how to suck people into your site! 70+ comments from an entry based on taking something out of context and throwing a fit. Marketing genius you are, sir. Bravo.

Cooljcookie: it's a skill. Starbucks still charges me $3.10 for a latte, though. :-)

What does all of this mean anyway? All I can see is Robert disagreeing with Jakob. So what?

Bravo, Scoble! Thank heavens that someone's finally told the king of Usabilitania that he's got no clothes.

I guess that's not quite the right analogy. In the Grimm fairy tale the boy is innocent and unthinking, while the king is stupid and unthinking and accepts the word of a couple of rogues. The boy hits on the truth, albeit accidentally.

But here I think the difference is that Scoble is fresh and airy, bouncy and lively and still uncertain, whereas Nielsen is earnest and plodding and academic and very heavy in his certainty.

Hare and tortoise? Three little pigs? There's probably a good fairy tale analogy somewhere here.

Scoble,

Personalities, history, and foibles aside, there are many roads that lead to Rome, and Neilsen has picked out one that works for him.

He's specifically targeting that method to less than 1% of the population, and specifically targeting that method to in-depth, complex, multi-faceted business challenges.

As such, that makes perfect sense.

Your blog, on the other hand, is short bits that invariably link elsewhere, keeping reading on top of developing news, conversations, trends, etc. Totally different purpose, totally different form, totally different style.

He is Encyclopedia Britannica; you are watercooler. Both are good, both are needed, both are valuable.

They're just different.

(And btw, yes, his design sucks, and yes, he needs to update it.)

Keen and Nielsen are coming at this issue from totally different perspectives, so to lump them together is ridiculous. I wrote a piece about Keen in one of my recent AlwaysOn Network columns. Keen's point has much more to do with signal-to-noise. And I'd argue that his personal views are even harsher than what was published in his book: Just view the video of him during his AO OnHollywood panel. He's a "50 bloggers might matter and shoot the rest" kind of guy. My solution was to come up with better metrics, better search techniques, NOT to shoot all the bloggers, so I view Keen as way too extreme.

Nielsen is a UXD (user experience design) guy with a lot of credentials. The fact that he has one of the ugliest sights is, in fact, a good contrast to what UXD is all about: It is NOT about Flash, AJAX, or any of the latest tools from Microsoft, Adobe or Sun. It's a Jakob Nielsen vs. Ryan Stewart sort of thing. Both have their place. Nielsen is more strategic, Stewart is more tactical. Nielsen without Stewart is a bunch of theory; Stewart without Nielsen is graphic for graphics sake, doing things because they can be done, not because they should be done.

Another problem with the whole UXD field is that too many claim expertise in this subject matter. It's way too easy to add our personal perspectives -- and biases -- to a UXD discussion. It's also harder to prove that one way is better than another; metrics are all over the map. You pick one metric to prove that you're right; I'll pick another metric to prove that I'm right.

This kind of stuff doesn't happen as easily in areas like search, or certainly in areas like bioinformatics. Sure, there are a lot of differing perspectives. Take a look at a batch of scholarly research on any of these topics and you'll find lots of different positions. But Steve Jobs can say that he likes this UI better than another; he can't really say that his favorite search algorithm is necessarily better than another search algorithm unless he's able to get into a discussion which is likely way over his head. Yet, with all things UI design/UXD related, everyone seems to have an opinion. It's much more emotional than cerebral. In some companies, a UI design gets feedback from just about everyone including the janitorial staff. UI aspects of search can be this way, e.g., the new Ask UI. But I doubt that everyone chimed in on which algorithms to use, how to integrated Ask results into a KM system. This is the unfortunate state of UXD: Everyone, regardless of qualifications, can add their 2 cents.

Also, Robert, just because you're a success, it doesn't mean that you're not a statistical outlier. You were early, you had the backing of Microsoft, you played the game. How many others have tried to copy you or Arrington but with limited (or no) success? Read/Write Web, yes. Some have, sure. But how many have failed trying? So just because something works for you, don't assume it will work for everyone. Twitter is a PERFECT example of something that will have EXTREMELY limited appeal, but you seem to love it.

My point: You and a lot of the A-list bloggers are NOT early adopters; you're more often than not statistical outliers. Twitter, Second Life, all sorts of other crap. Fun for a while, but stuff that will die, will simply become a footnote in web annals.

@Michael Clarke, the only reason I mentioned that I was blogging from China was due to the time stamp on the comment. If it wasn't stamped at nearly 4 am, I wouldn't have said anything. Besides, being in China is NOT an ego experience; it's more like being in purgatory, but I have my personal reasons (and some professional reasons) for staying here.

David: Twitter might be extremely limited, but seems to be doing just fine, even with two very good competitors (and with Facebook too).

http://www.twittervision.com is seeing TONS of Twitters every few seconds. It is so "not popular" that I can't keep up.

I have been called a statistical outlier many times before. When personal computers came out many people said that only weird geeks would use them.

When email came along, I remember people telling me no one needs that.

When IM came along and I was early then people told me that only kids would use it and that businesses would never use it.

Etc. Etc.

You forget that there aren't many Alisters, but there are millions of bloggers out there with more being added every day (and that's after subtracting out the spam ones).

Nielsen has credentials, sure. But I think he studies the late followers too much. That causes many people to miss the ball. The world is changing. But Nielsen's data still shows the way the world is, not the way the world is changing to.

If that gets me derided as an outlier, so be it.

But it's the statistical outliers who'll tell you where the world will be tomorrow. Not the guys like Nielsen who study the way the world is yesterday.

Okay, we may have FINALLY nailed this discussion, thanks to an observation by Richard MacManus over at Read/Write Web. (See http://tinyurl.com/2ryo9r .)

The difference may be between ANALYSIS blogs (like Read/Write Web) and NEWS blogs (like TechCrunch, and this blog). Both have their place. Amen to that?

And we each have our personal preferences. I prefer analysis blogs, although I read TC, Techmeme, yada, yada, but I try to limit the number of news blogs that I read.

Also, too many news blogs say the same basic thing over and over and over again, not within the same blog, but by other blogs. Techmeme is a perfect example of this. Let's be honest, most of the secondary posts (i.e., those linking to the primary post) are worthless. The problem is that there may be a gem or two among the high noise level. After a while, we hope we can pick those that matter from those that don't. Another problem is that the news blogs may get something first, i.e., become the primary post, but a secondary ANALYSIS blog may have much more useful and thoughtful information.

Robert, I don't care if each sentient being on this planet has a blog or not. Keen's position is too extreme. But we need a better way to sift through what is important and what is not.

Also, you can post photos of your dog or child or whatever and get away with it, but it's NOT a good strategy for most bloggers. You have an almost cult-like following. Good for you (I guess). But this strategy doesn't work well for most bloggers.

Regarding being a statistical outlier, you're dead wrong. Betting on everything doesn't make someone a successful gambler. Twitter is noise and will have limited appeal. Might have some utility as an updating service, kind of like a 911 blast message. But for normal discourse, no way: Way too much noise.

I was one of those guys who built an Altair 640 back in 1975, was at the opening of the first personal computer store in the world at 820 Broadway in Santa Monica in September 1975. Even prior to this, I was an HP-65 guy, so we're talking early adopter stuff. Regarding e-mail, I had a Bitnet account. Did you? (It was restricted back then.) And I used Lynx for web "browsing", prior to any graphical browser. And, as you might expect at this point, I used IRC.

But not ALL tools make sense. Like I said, betting on everything (or just about everything) does NOT make one a successful gambler.

Second Life will fail, but something will come along to replace it. It's simply the next generation after Worlds, Inc. The technology simply isn't ready yet, nor are social structures. Twitter functionality might have some utility, like I mentioned, but creates too much noise in general. Basically, a step in the right direction, but a failure waiting to happen. (Evolution is a tricky thing. Or, to put it another way, pioneers usually end up with arrows in their back.)

There are a lot of little steps in the right direction, but will they take hold for the masses, will they cross the chasm? No, not in their existing forms. Somebody else will get it right, offer a fully baked version that will be acceptable to the masses. IRC couldn't cut it. Remember use Pine for e-mail? That didn't cut it, either. Remember CUSeeMe? All steps in the right direction; all failed to thrive as new products and services too hold. (Yes, there are some geeks still using Pine and IRC; maybe even someone still uses Lynx. But they're hardly mainstream when the core tech is now mainstream, i.e., e-mail and IM.)

Search isn't even close to being where it needs to be. Good a Google challenger come along? Don't know. Might be Microsoft ... or IBM; doesn't have to be a start-up like Powerset. But we ALL know that search sucks, has a long, long way to go. And even when we get search right (or better), then we're merely moving up the food chain to knowledge management issues. And what is all this for: Collaboration, not merely communication. This is one reason the iPhone doesn't matter as much as many think. It's a step in the right direction, but communication is so yesterday ... and it's not a platform for collaboration.

So, as an early adopter, can you really recommend the iPhone? It's just a communications device, that's it. Nice UI. Wow!! Is really revolutionary? If you think, just check SIGCHI proceedings published 5-15 years ago and you'll see just about everything that makes the iPhone special. No big deal. Jobs had the guts and courage to take it to market; for this he deserves a lot praise. But the device itself: Come on!! Jon Peddie + SIGCHI = iPhone. No big deal. It wasn't hard to see it coming. (Unfortunately, I no longer have access to Jon Peddie's newsletter and at about $5,000 per year, it won't make my short list anytime soon.)

Here's a piece of advice: Read Technology Forecasting & Social Change. Futures is also good, so is Long Range Planning, blogs by EDS and the IFTF, Shaping Tomorrow, things like this. (I'll soon be joining Shaping Tomorrow's contributing staff.) But TF&SC is MUST reading to put tech in perspective. You'll laugh your butt off at how wrong forecasters (whatever you want to call them) can be. Also, read Paul Saffo's current feature in Harvard Business Review. GREAT stuff. It's always important to match technology with society. People are indeed users, but people form a society -- they are more than mere users.

dood! how come nobody told me that clicking on the link of the dud'es press photos is NSFW?!?!

So Nielsen preaches an academic attitude towards blogging; nothing wrong with that. I find myself regularly wondering if this is worth posting or that I should do more fact/background checking.

I don't like quick, short copycat blogs. But that's just my opinion. I thought the blogosphere was us, and therefore open to the opinions of many.

Clearly Scoble has strong negative sentiments towards Nielsen, but the way he voices them are pretty immmature. I didn't got that impression from him when reading "Naked conversations". Pity.

Marc: what Nielsen advocates is not blogging. No "joining in the conversation." He stays "above it all" and only posts "long, authoritative" posts. No trackbacks. No bookmarking icons. No comments. No ping servers. No links out to other people talking about him.

Just long academic posts.

I'm very open to the opinions of others -- if they join in.

Nielsen has not, so can't be considered a blogger. Sorry. And if that makes me immature so be it.

You can call it poking fun at yourself, but your neediness shines through.

First, not all of his Alertbox columns are "long academic posts."

Second, but even if they were, this doesn't necessarily discount their value. Thought leadership pieces are a good thing. Thought leadership is hard, if not impossible, to convey is a relatively short blog post.

Third, he couldn't have said what he did in less words. If he would have, he would have been susceptible to a lot more criticism, I'm sure. He needed to write a long(er) column to make his point, to prove his point. Haven't you found this to be the case with your own writings? I write very controversial stuff, probably because I have a tougher topic than you: China. People often respond to things about China will little or misguided first-hand knowledge of what it's like here, what goes on in our industry, without understanding the role of the three (or four) key government agencies guiding our sector. People just react. Lots of emotion, often based on little fact, almost no experience. And then it also gets political. It's a minefield. So, in order to make a point, I often have to write a long(er) column with a gazillion links to prove my point. That's life. Nielsen knew he needed to write a long(er) article/column to make his point.

Also, a lot of the best technologies cannot be discussed in blog postings. I'm surprised you don't know this. Example: How am I going to talk about the advantages of combining Kalman filtering algorithms with backpropagation neural nets in a pithy blog post? Not doable (or, if it theoretical was doable, it would be meaningless).

Fourth, he never claimed that he's a blogger. Regardless, what does this have to do with anything? Let's face it, Robert, most people are lurkers. They read, they rarely (if ever) comment. Does this mean that most people are not part of the conversation? Ever heard of the "silent majority"? They're still part of the conversation unless the elitists have no regard for what the silent majority may really be thinking. It's up to bloggers to try to find out what the silent majority is thinking, not to be falsely led into believing that people like you and those of us commenting on this post (like me) represent the majority. We may not.

Some more food for thought ...

Anyway, even your supporters seem to think you overreacted. I suspect that you now agree with them. This isn't to concede that you believe that Nielsen is right; that would be false and disingenuous. But give him some space. If you really want an open conversation, don't jump all over someone with reactionary tendencies. Alas, you're just another blogger Jihadist!! ;-) Peace, my friend ...

Wow, Robert, you really are clueless at times. You don't even get why Shelley was calling you insecure.

You reek of insecurity in a whiny, weak way and try to cover it up by saying that you make fun of yourself so you're secure? Yeah, Bush makes fun of himself so he's not stupid, right?

WHAT?

He didn't even mention you? Not once. So you decided to apply everything he said you your site, take offence, and then whine about it, making yourself the focus of this?

You have a grudge against Nielson? His work is fair, I have gone into detail on much of his stuff.

You take what he has written, a valid poke at the off the cuff gossipy nature of the web, which has collapsed into a link whoring state of noise, and then make a 'insult-but-I-won't-say-what' expression about him.

Post saved, one day to be juxtapositioned against Niesen's to show what an asshat you are scoble. tsk.

What: he didn't mention me, you're right, but I did take offense. His advice here is bad, but you keep that post, OK?

Scoble, what a beautiful secondary, reflective and superficial, egotistical, linkwhoring post about this article.

It actually says: regardless of software (a way to stop idiots like you confusing what is a blog / not a blog) there are valuable signal posts, places that link and collate articles, and then the dregs of the web.

The noise. I am glad you self labelled yourself in that role. I realise you must be tired of being just the link person, and then seeing yourself in this mirror of Neisens post really must have been the last straw.

You have nothing of value to write, so you take any context you can from his post now and dispute it, making it look like an attack on you. sad.

N) Don’t have fun like that idiot Scoble.

Don't have fun? Idiot Scoble?

Wow. You really read a lot into that. I pity you now.

Hey Scoble, I didn't expect you to reply, now you did I will be more curteous - why did you take offense? Precisely... I am curious, what element of it related to your post. I can see you disagreeing, but where did you take offense?

Thanks

>You have nothing of value to write

So why are you here then? Did someone hold a gun to your head and say "go check out that valueless Scoble?"

Why did I take offense?

Because I wrote a whole book about how corporations are getting better customer relations through doing exactly what he decried.

I've seen lots of things happen due to short, seemingly "noisy" posts. Heck, you should see what's happening over on Twitter, Pownce, Jaiku, and Facebook -- all places you've gotta stick to 140 characters or less. But I've seen enough business activity happen over there to know that Jakob's advice is bad if taken alone.

"What: he didn’t mention me, you’re right, but I did take offense. His advice here is bad."

I look forward to finding out why you took offense, but as for the advice, which part is bad? Before you start talking about butchers and thank yous, he talks about content being higher than the software used to write it.

You can write news on a blog engine. You can blog on a twitter engine. You can twitter on a joomla portal.

Did you take offense at that distinction?

The 3 points about primary / secondary, indepth / superficial, users expertise (actually adding something) versus reflectively driven.

I think the 'superficial and reflective' is what offended you, if I am wrong, let me know.

This really wasn't about you though. It is about the mass of secondary, tertiary, superficial and reflective content online though. It also says, don't feel you have to blog because you installed 'blog' software.

> >You have nothing of value to write

> So why are you here then? Did someone hold a gun to
> your head and say “go check out that valueless
> Scoble?”

I meant generally, point me to posts of primary source - the vast majority (from what you said) seems to be what I mentioned.

> Why did I take offense?

> Because I wrote a whole book about how corporations
> are getting better customer relations through doing
> exactly what he decried.

Why offense? If I write a book saying outsourcing is a good strategy, and someone writes that building an internal department is good, where is the reason for offense?

> I’ve seen lots of things happen due to short,
> seemingly “noisy” posts. Heck, you should see
> what’s happening over on Twitter, Pownce, Jaiku,
> and Facebook — all places you’ve gotta stick to 140
> characters or less. But I’ve seen enough business
> activity happen over there to know that Jakob’s
> advice is bad if taken alone.

Sadly this seems to be out of the scope of what the article covers. It isn't denigrating these services or saying that they don't build anything.

It is talking about content structure, and not internet dynamics, yes it reflects on the majority of content online, but in a good way:

"The beauty of the blogosphere is that it's a self-organizing system. Whenever something good appears, other blogs link to it and it gets promoted in the system and gains higher visibility. Thus, the 24 postings that are better than our expert's very best attempt will gain higher prominence, even though they're written by people with lower overall expertise."

(I hate the use of the word blogosphere).

For validation of Jakob's article, look at A List Apart - that seems to fit what he is talking about.

You seem to have substituted something else you are thinking about in place of what he is writing about.

I also thought the 'I am not saying he is dirty, but don't shake his hand' approach to saying you 'know' something about him, was a very low blow.

> But I’ve seen enough business
> activity happen over there to know that Jakob’s
> advice is bad if taken alone.

So where is the offense? It seems like 'bad if taken alone', even if true, or indeed what he was writing about, doesn't justify martyring your blog and putting words in Nielsens blog, knowing most of your readers wouldn't even link through and read it to verify themselves (bored after first paragraph)

You are defining what happens on twitterjaikssikefacewtf by the 140, not by the content, this is what Jakob is warning against. Its not the format, or needlessly the length, but a combination of 3 factors (and in this case, not about communication in a p2p sense, but disseminating information for mass reading, publishing, not talking.)

Probably it had more to do with his headline:

"Write articles, not blog postings."

It was a direct slap at people like me who blog.

Print: you're right about the low blow. But I have my reasons.

> Probably it had more to do with his headline:
> “Write articles, not blog postings.”
> It was a direct slap at people like me who blog.

It is hardly a slap to point the obvious that there is different value in writing articles, and shows that A List Apart uses blogging style software, but writes articles.

It says - don't be defined by the medium, the software. In this sense he is saying the same as you in so much that you enjoy the business benefits of the 140character club.

However, you see the difference between 'community based' clique messaging and linking and online resources.

So as you say 'things happen' on 140chars, Nielsen says 'authorative posts' can happen on blogs. Sadly for the most part we have to take him on his word, although there are such sites around.

Reading below the title, Nielsen makes a terse and reasonable equation of his article:

"If you're an expert who wants to live from adding to the world's knowledge, you must go beyond the mainstream Web model of single page visits driven by search traffic. It's easy enough to build a website that freeloaders will use, but that shouldn't be your approach. You must change the game and create content that's so valuable that business users are willing to pay for it.

You should also focus on material that lower-ranked content contributors can't easily create in their spare time.

Both of these needs are met when you produce in-depth content. "

What, may I ask, is wrong with that? It clearly isn't the points you raise above, and it an entirely different topic to that of twitter models.

I would say you missed the point, but that is possibly the least of your issues with this whole affair.

I do not deny you have some beef with this, but perhaps it is a symptom of you own coming to terms with content, as a resource.

Just to add: "If you’re an expert who wants to live from adding to the world’s knowledge, you must go beyond the mainstream Web model of single page visits driven by search traffic."

This clearly shows that this *isn't* aimed at you.

You don't claim to be someone 'adding knowledge' nor has any of your work been geared towards this. Your job as a consultant doesn't carry over into knowledgable posts on this site.

So, in fact, it is definately not about you. Why you have a problem with it, and why you made the hysterical post you did is beyond me and I suppose everyone else who didn't make the same glib conclusion without reading into it.

It's aimed at Scooble and all other bloggers. I don't see that Scooble's post is hysterical at all, other than being a pretty funny and ironic take on what our friend the refined & notable expert is hoaxing up on his own little weblog. Yes, the old school paradigm guarder Mr. J writes a weblog. He just doesn't get it.

See Usability Expert Misses the Magic of Blogging for my response.

No offence friend, but this is quite the presumptuous post. It requires quite the herculean stretch (and quite an ego) to conclude that post was aimed specifically at you

I think Nielssen is partially right. That's why I unscribed Scoble's RSS feed some months ago. Too many posts, I felt disconnected because I couldn't follow all the topics.

I like more Jeff Atwood's "Coding Horror" type of posts. But it is just my opinion

Ringelnatz

Bloody hell, shut up you narcissist whore.

Why the hell do you even still post? Does anyone actually read the rubbish you do? You once posted good content now it's just mindless, stupid commentary.

Whew, man, you really should take it less personal. That was just his opinion, nothing more than that.

Perhaps the meaning of the word Blog has been forgotten. If I'm not mistaken (and correct me if I'm wrong), a blog is a web log, in most cases a personal web log. A log of what you do, say, think, etc...

It's not just about the posts but also about the bookmarks you made (for example: del.icio.us integration), pictures you took (some form of gallery),
content you like reading (blogroll), etc...

As Dawn Douglass, it's your blog,
you do what you want.
As long as your blog remains a blog and doesn't become a portal, I don't see any reason not to add
all these nice features to your blog.

People who are simply interested in your blogentries
will either get the RSS feed or read the center of the page while ignoring the extra features in the sidebars.

* Correction: As Dawn Douglass already stated *

ok not a blogger, just a reader, and got linked here from http://www.codinghorror.com/blog/archives/00091....

I read both Nielson's post and then yours... wow, you really are a pretentious f@ckwit. Not only that, you are an insecure loser.

I mean, I think the argument is boringly irrelevant at best, but what makes you a complete jackass is that instead of objectively pointing out why you disagree with him, you just start dishing out abuse - like what are you? still in high school? you might as well get it over with and call him a poo bum stupid head.

Get over yourself.

Every time I end up on this blog I have the same reaction: WTF???

I am not sure he mentions you in the post. There is therapy for narcism you know.

Well, Mr. Scoble, although I have vague recollections of hearing about "that Scoble guy from Microsoft" and his blog, this is the first time I have visited your blog and it will be the last. I have to agree with many of the other comments here - your brief post is chock-full of narcissism, ad-hominem attacks, and petty statements along the line of "I'm way too un-petty to tell you just how horrible Nielsen is." Yikes.

I'd much rather read Nielsen and find figure out all the problems with his logic than read posts like yours, where you verbally defecate all over yourself in full public view.

1. I don't recall him using your name in the blog, as a matter of fact, a text search shows that your name is nowhere to be found. Perhaps a quote would help in the future, that way users can be sure that you're not putting words in someone else's mouth (like you are here).

2. Your site is by far more ugly. Friendly advice: get rid of the serif font, don't center a page that has no color scheme, and don't center everything in your navigation.

3. Yeah, I don't see much substance at all to your blog, and I probably won't be back to it, but that's my preference. You're digital temper tantrum up there doesn't impress me much, either.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narcissism
Agree with Matt.
You just made a fool of yourself dude.

That Woz name dropping bit was just what I needed to... move along.

I think the Nielsen article was thoughtful and interesting, and I think this is spiteful and childish. Seriously, he "doesn’t have trackbacks". You must be joking.

You know how those Ph.d's are: long-winded and full of themselves.

Also.. likes others have said, I don't see him using your name anywhere.. but that doesn't mean he didn't mean you in an underlying way since you two worked together... BLOGFIGHT!

I really enjoyed this post. I have been away for some time and was led here by your "Did Digg Link Here" post. The personal details make you human.

Funny, but when I searched Nielsen's post, I didn't see you mentioned once.

Not once..You self-absorbed twit. The posting wasn't about you, Robert. Geesh.

Clue: Not every post on the internet is about Robert Scoble.

How utterly childish and immature you are.

Jacob Nielsen says "You probably already know my own Internet strategy" in which he links to a <del>post</del> article dated September 29, 2003.

nuff said.

Yes the guys "Article" was not about you but about these types of blogs. I agree Nielsen is rather hard headed about the fact that these personal blogs are meant to be exactly that, personal and fun, not professional.

I have my own blog and it's no where near professional and I don't even care. I don't have some English writing major like some people, I just make postings, not articles, about my feelings and opinions. Blogs are just online public journals. I could give a rats ass about attracting paying customers.

Thanks for posting this. I wouldn't have known or cared what Jakob Nielsen said unless I had read it here.

In my opinion, this

"Well, I wish I could tell you the truth about Jacob but Steve Wozniak taught me to never say anything if I can’t say something nice about someone."

translates to something like:

"Well, I wish I could say something bad about Mr Nielsen, but I can't. Nevertheless I'll say something, while quoting a celebrity teaching the opposite..."

What is it Nielsen is trying to clarify? I did read it, and I think he has some points worth reflection. Sorry, it's not possible to condense it to a few oneliners, but then again it's actually a short article. Read it first, comment later...

The blogosphere may be one thing, but individual blogs can differ a lot (and their audience too). And it does make a difference how you do it. Nielsen isn't into a Blogs-are-all-bad/good rant. But about what works better/worse when blogging.

Yes, I know that Nielsens site looks boring, but he's not trying to entertain you either. He certainly has a topic: usability. What this blog is about I'm not so sure (just stumbled upon it), but the present post seems to all about Scoble, Scoble, Scoble...

So what is the point?
1. He can be called blogger if
a. he allows trackback/comments/feed

Sorry he does not need your certificate, just as you do not need his.

Heck this is web, if he has readers who prefer it that way, good for him. How and where you got the posture to come out wildly at him.

Not everybody needs a blog or has energy to go into nitty gritty of standards for shifting sand like tweeter.

Most of us have the day jobs and lives and web is just small part of it. Billions are not connected to the web and may not want to. Phone yes, not web.

So get off the self promotion bit by attacking somebody who has better credentials. You are famous for infamous reasons (link man with fascination for things which have shelf life of 2 days) - sorry had to say something bad to overcome all the dumb stuff you said earlier in the blog/comments.

Robert, you are special, and I love your sense of humor. I think that those who are special and those who disregard the critisim that is not constructive; those who are thoughtful and are able to analyze their activities - those absolutely have to do what they feel they should do. People like you create rules for others to follow. Thanks for you blog!

Jakob Nielsen sounds like a really jealous writer. Why else would he go out of his way to criticize another blogger like this? I think Scoble's doing a pretty decent job with his posts.

I feel some of you didn't read Mr Nielsen's article. Nielsen wasn't targeting any one person. Scoble is an A-list blogger to be sure. He maybe is an expert at blogging, but that's about it. I've read Robert's postings from time to time and enjoy some of them. But for me none of them have any lasting value. They are mostly like pop culture. What's new and exciting now, is boring or outdated 6 hours, 6 days, 6 weeks or 6 months from now. Though that probably describes most of the regular Scobelizer readers I imagine.

I have a large collection of bookmarks to content I've found interesting. Almost none of it is on a blog, it's mostly in depth articles found on more traditional web sites. Now you certainly can do those on a blog, but most people that blog don't. I think part of the problem is that people new to blogging think you need to post short, frequent notes about this or that and real content is to difficult and must be posted on a "real' website. This happens because most of the blogs they see are like that.

Nielsen is saying that if your are an expert provide content people can't find elsewhere, that gives them better value. Short twitter about "check out my friend at _______ kind of posts are essentially useless to most out of the gate and almost everyone a year later. Why clutter the web with useless posts -- just because it's easy I guess.

Actually I think the one thing Robert excels best at is being an opportunist. Robert, you know Nielsen's post wasn't about you, but you know you can stir up controversy by pretending you think that it was.

There's obviously different kinds of people, and the content of your site should depend on the type of audience / customer you're wishing to lock on to.
That's why I do agree with Jakob's statement that, “To demonstrate world-class expertise, avoid quickly written, shallow postings. Instead, invest your time in thorough, value-added content that attracts paying customers.”
Even though you didn't agree, Scoble, the fact is that he is right on this point. But, as you said, there's a place for both of them. Yes, I also just want to know that there's meat in Aisle. 4 but I don't consider some of my passionate interests 'meat.' With those, I want details!

I’m a guilty of posting too quickly some time ago. As a result, I was tagged as spamming! Shocks! I think when posting, you should do it in a pacing that’s not too fast that blogs might see you as robots.

Scoble -- What an ego.

Did you even read the article?