It's a bit a fun where you can tweet cars (use the registration number/licence plate in a hashtag) and if the car's owner has a twitter account then they'll be informed. Great for the the "hey. You've left your lights on!" kinda things. If the owner is not on twitter then it'll post the tweet on the howdy homepage anyway.

 The app is not as polished as I'd like, not a long way in truth. but I've found from bitter previous experience that, left up to me, projects will never leave the early phases (remember planetdetails.com anyone? Nope...). I decided a different tack with howdycar.com - release it early and if people find it useful then enhance/polish etc - kinda Darwinian I suppose!

 As I say, it's just a bit of fun but I think it does help highlight how twitter can involve itself in everyday lives and can help us interact with old habits/objects in new ways (in this case our cars).

 Please feel free to have a play with it and let me have your comments/suggestions.

 http://howdycar.com

 Joel
Sent from my BlackBerry® wireless device

 There's also been a lot of talk about how this monetization might affect the fundamentals of the service. The thoughts are that Twitter's usage plan for the service might be quite different to how users are currently using it. Twitter have not been afraid to tinker with the raw operational mechanics either (I.e the recent follow/DM debacle).

 So, people are quite anxious about how Twitter might change and adversely affect their service. I say, don't be - because if Twitter change the game too much it just opens the door to someone else to fill the void. "But!" (I hear you shriek) "Twitter have 500 jazillion users - that's end of game!". To which I would say the following:

 1) User bases online are very, very fickle - they can blow away in the breeze - this months exponential growth rate could be next months unprecidented stagnantion rate.

 2) Those who live by the API can die by the API. Twitter is a very simple service which is also the reason for it's success. Many 3rd parties have greatly enhanced the service by building on the application programming interface (API). This same API which has helped fuel Twitter can also be the key to it's undoing - eg Google (for example) could use this API to tap in all your profile information/tweet history/followers etc and dump you into a new service. You are not forever tied to Twitter. If want to provide a service which is open (as any good web app should be) this is a necessary evil - you can't have your cake and eat it.

 3) This life streaming/micro blogging concept is new terroritory. Yes Twitter are at the healm in these uncharted waters but that also means they could be the first to hit the iceberg. History tells us that the early race leaders aren't always the "winners".

 Why do I mention Google as a possible competitor? Well, they're the obvious one. They know how to host massive applications which require equally demanding uptimes. They are also very, VERY interested in what we have to see and being able to search/index those tweets.

 So, Twitter are massive - will they be the big player in 3 years time? We'll see but it's not set in stone.

 I typically use FB to stay in contact with a small circle of close friends. I tend not to muck around with the applications as I typically interact with FB via the simple (and now in considerable need of an update) FB Blackberry app (v1.3, 1.5 is meant to be much improved and just around the corner).

 The facelift to FB was ok with me - I prefer the stream of comments etc.

 One thing I don't like in the FB timeline summary (as opposed to how FF do it - these guys appear to be the source of many of the best features!) is that if you comment on a status update it does not go back to the top of the list; which it should in my mind as is the comment atleast is a very recent update.

 The other killer thing I like about FB is the photos and sharing - very slick.

 With FB I've never really got my head around if I can segregate my friends etc - you seem to be able to create groupings but I don't know how this affects your status updates. I.e. there are things I'd quite happily say to my brother which shouldn't really be visible elsewhere!

 I like the concept of "life streaming" as I really want to know what my friends are up to (primarily) with the ability to comment back and forth. FF seems to be very good at this for two reasons: 1) ability to create closed rooms (twitter doesn't have this but it does in Japan I think?) 2) IM access - I can interact with FF intuitively via a variety of sources including instant messenger (this used to be part of twitter - perhaps it'll be back again one day as they sort their infrastructure out)

 Twitter I'm playing with as I think it's a good way to interact with people I don't already know (as opposed to the more close way I use FB). The search is very interesting!

 If FB carry on evolving (aka nicking stuff from FF) then that might swing it for me but how long will FB be around? Aren't they burning a $1,000,000 a month on their web server electricity bill alone? How long can THAT go on for? What's the point in serving 200 million users if you're making no money? Are they just winging it so that as the medium evolves they'll evolve their billing model to fit with it? Online advertising with FB seems to be not doing the trick for them (do we never learn with this?!)

 Very interested in how other people are using these apps.

 Also, do you think FB will be the big player in 3-5 years time? I doubt it...

 It made me think that yes, companies react to negative PR on the web now but is that to do with the novelty of the medium (eg Twitter)? How would this social opinion on the web help form my opinion if (say) if had to choose a trans atlantic flight? I mean I could search twitter (great fun in itself!) or (and perhaps more relevant) search the greater fun http://cursebird.com for references to BA and Virgin.

 Gut feel is that there will be complaints about both parties (people like to complain a lot more than they do to praise). Most of who I will not know.

 This then falls into the same distrust I have for reviews on websites where everything is either 5 stars ("it's great!") or 1 star ("it sucks!"). I smell a rat and, therefore, I do not give it equal (any?) weighting with other inputs when forming my decision.

 What will change this though is social meta data - knowing the opinion of my friends (and their trusted friends) is much more important because we are dealing with a web of trust - in short the "opinion mass".

 Imagine visiting Amazon etc and you have the option to see only product reviews from people 'n' hops from you in your circle of friends (facebook/twitter and next gen apps). This could be a pretty big audience and the content could be that more trusted.

 Also 'n' hops could be configurable - ie don't see any reviews in your circle of friends+2 hops? Then try circle+3. Reporting "spam" comments/reviews is also more benefical as your are essentially performing housekeeping on your own "opinion mass" (and cleaning up it up for others as well).

 This "opinion mass" could also be harnessed by producers - if I visit BA or Virgin and they are aware of the "opinion mass" then they should alter there prices accordingly. If my "opinion mass" is decidely anti BA then this is an opportunity for them to put a smile on our face. And if I visit Virgin they might see this as an opportunity to compound this negative BA opinion.

 Obviously the bigger the opinion mass the more away it holds.

 Long live the revolution!

 Ideally the server would get complex enough to pass the Alun Turing test where the human participant is unsure whether the other participant is human or machine.

 What's the point of this? Well, ghoulishly this could be chatting to the dead. I know, sounds nuts but bear with with! With complex enough software (and a rich enough databases of stories/phrases etc) then interacting with such a service might provide some comfort no? Comfort to the living and maybe comfort to the dead as an "interactive" bit of them is left online.

 But how would the software be able to generate a rich enough picture of you to mimic you? Well, a good start would be social networking - Facebook/Twitter etc these will leave a mamouth trail of data to help reconstruct your chatting traits.

 Perhaps this is why Facebook want to own our data? So that they can sell the "dead chat" service to our loved ones when we've gone!

 The application I use most of the time is a piece of software which understands how to talk http...the web browser.

 For my sins, the underlying o/s is Microsoft Vista but the main applications I launch were typically Firefox, Opera and (for testing purposes only due to its shocking sluggishness) Internet Explorer. I use the past tense because I was quick to download Google Chrome which I now use religiously due to that fact that it runs javascript heavy web 2.0 apps (Freshbooks, Basecamp, Lighthouse, Harvest, Highrise etc) with ease. To summarise - my application needs have evolved out of the realm of the raw file'n'folder o/s.

 Do I feel sorry for MS with this? Nah!. Bill knew "The Internet" was coming a long time ago but his ego and his belief in the Redmund Behemouth was just too big to think that there might be something out there which was bigger than them or that they could not control. Foolish.

 The web is the new o/s.

http://www.highrisehq.com (HR)

Highrise (HR) is a simple, web based CRM tool written by the folks at 37signals.

I used to class my reliance on HR as in the same league as Freshbooks until quite recently. I love the way I can assign tasks via email as well as BCC emails or FWD emails so that they are attached to contacts set up there. It's become more and more important for me to be able to go back to clients and say "No, no, no. We agreed X at Y" and HR is a great dump for that. 

However, I've recently moved over to GMAIL to handle the JOJET.COM emails. Now one of the (many) reasons I migrated to Google was because I was having problems searching for past emails and what does Google do well? Yeah, search. The search tool in GMAIL is very powerful with many, many options to help you target exactly what category of message you are looking for.

The HR search compared to GMAIL's is like comparing the Wright Brothers Kitty Hawk to a Saturn V rocket - no contest.

Tags and cases

GMAIL search made me think "hmmm...ok I am storing this info in HR because it's important for me to track it BUT does HR give me easy access to it?". The answer currently is a resounidng no. HR has organisational facilities of "tag", "case" and "deal" but none of this helps me much. 'Tag' operates at customer record level (e.g. flag all customers of type x). 'Case' is a great way of grouping associated notes BUT (unless I'm missing something here) there is no way to see what cases apply to a client when you are looking at a particular client's record - e.g. if I had a client and I was working on three separate "projects" with them then I should easily be able to carve into those from that client's page as that would be the logical jumping off point no? 

Deal or no deal?

The final (and still fairly recent addition) is "deals". Deals look like cases with a bit of dressing on them. I suppose they were setup to help properly track what jobs being pitched for have been won or lost - but seeing as this isn't really am itch I need to scratch, the lightbulb doesn't come on for me (sorry for mixing my metaphors). I DO like deals though because, unlike cases, they DO have a higher level of visibility when in a client's record. So, I could use deals to group clients notes the way I want but this would be almost bastardising the deals concept which always makes me feel a bit uncomfortable; like when I start to hammer nails into a chest of drawers from IKEA with a pliers - it just feels wrong and I know that something will break if I carry on.

So I've established that I fire off emails into HR but I don't really search for them (as it's such a pain) and organising them in HR is tricky as the tools are too primitive. I started thinking that perhaps I could skip HR as, when in GMAIL, with judicious application of the right labels etc (and with GMAIL's superior searching) I could get access to the info a lot more easily (with the admitted constraint that I lose the multiuser access - that wouldn't be a problem now but could change in future). Find what I quote (and what the client reponded with) in GMAIL for a client would be a lot easier in GMAIL.

Tasks

One thing I have found that I love HR for is handling tasks. I use my Blackberry (BB) a lot and, in an attempt to learn a lesson from the "Getting Things Done" book, I try to make sure that relevant tasks are recorded for action rather than being kept in my easily overpowered brain's RAM. From my BB I can email tasks direct to the nice HR "tasks" screen and, better still, on the email specify whether this task is for today, tomorrow, this week, next week, later etc.

...but tasks aren't what HR is really there to solve...it's meant to be a simple CRM. Again I'm feeling I'm using the wrong tools on my latest purchase from IKEA.

A futher issue for me is why stick loads of contact data in HR when it is already in my GMAIL contacts? I can't stand having data in two places (three with my BB). And surely before you immediately try to cross the sync canyon (e.g. custom API, SOOCIAL etc) you should think - why do I need these two data stores? cannot I not bin one?

The End

I'm getting the feeling that my days with HR are numbered. A few months ago I would have found that hard to believe but the fundamental truth is that, whilst I pump a lot of information into HR, I don't get much out apart from working with tasks and I don't think tasks are best placed in HR. 

I read with interest today that Google may be interested in buying Skype - this certainly sounds a much better fit than when Ebay bought them (what was THAT about ?!).

Fundamentally offering VOIP applications which have a programmable API will open up many interesting applications.

One example I've been mulling over for a while is this... Google could extend Adwords/Analytics conversion tracking to cover phone numbers. Now my company has been offering trackable phone numbers for clients to differentiate between organic/PPC phone calls for a while but Google, with integrated SKYPE/VOIP technology, could go a step further...

Google could offer a unique phone number PER VISITOR and, therefore, a method to track what keywords are converting phone calls. This shines light over a missing link in conversion tracking for businesses who's customers still want to discover by web but contact by phone. Combine with this a web based CRM which can monitor previous phone calls and then assign them to the correct sales channel and you're in a much better situation to see what marketing initives are working.

Phone is definately going to become a programmable service which is another tool in the armoury of web/app development.

 One I was thinking of is almost like a 'virtual window' where you hold your device up and it shows you what ever geo overlayed information you want. Obviously this would work best if the device can tell what direction it is facing, what its orientation is etc. You could pan the device across your surroundings to see old pictures, information on buildings and more active things like how to book, tourist information etc

 I like it as it gives you a virtual window to see whatever additonal layer of information you are interested in and would work in a very intuitive way. I heard about an iPhone app which helps with identifying constelations in the night sky so it sounds like we're nearly there.