I was reading Dave Winers ÄúScripting NewsÄù this morning, 1/27/07, when I came across what I thought were some interesting and seeming conflicting statements.¬ Dave was discussing his attendance at an identity conference when he made the statement that:
…the reason I was able to make RSS 2.0 stick was that for a brief period I controlled all sides of the technology and could create consensus over a cup of coffee, with myself. I could have a conference in the morning, write the code in the afternoon, and ship it the next day. Seems there’s no equivalent opportunity in identity, which was already a contentious, fractured and divided world, before the Internet even existed.
I donÄôt think anyone could argue that the introduction of RSS 2.0 wasnÄôt a good thing for the Internet and itÄôs users.¬ Without the total control that Dave eluted to the final product might have been convoluted and certainly delayed. What I did find interesting was that later in the same post Dave commented on the closeness of Apple:
That made me think how Apple benefits from the openness of others. Suppose Denon were like Apple, and made a closed box, then I would be pissed because I’d have to use my Sony laptop to control it, but I would use the Sony, even though I prefer to use the Mac. The idea of user choice isn’t about good or bad, heaven or hell, it’s really pragmatic. Being open creates opportunities for companies like Apple, it allows them to coexist with monopolies like Windows, to develop a superior product, even though another company has dominant market share. Maybe someday Apple will dominate, but that day will likely be a bad day for open interfaces because while Apple benefits from the openness of others, they themselves aren’t willing to leave the door open for others.
How is the conflict resolved between; it was a good thing when Dave had complete control over the technology and could quickly and efficiently create the standards for RSS 2.0, thereby giving the public a product that works; but itÄôs a bad thing when Apple has complete control of itÄôs technology in order to deliver a superior product that works?
There’s a huge difference in scale here but is not the principle the same?¬
IÄôd love to read your input on this Dave.
Technorati Tags: dave winer, scripting news