Jason Unger

If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed. Thanks for visiting!

In Jakob Nielsen's Alertbox this week, he proposes an interesting next step for Microsoft, now that their bid for Yahoo! is over (emphasis is mine).

Now that Steve Ballmer has earned his bonus for the year by walking from overpaying for Yahoo, he needs to do something else with his $50B. One idea I would like him to try is to refund some of the outrageous sums harvested by search engines.

a) Give back to the websites that create the content that search engines currently scrape for free: pay sites for only being indexed in one search engine and refuse the other engines. In particular, allow access to deep link archives of value-added content for users entering from your search engine. Value proportion to users: When you search on engine X, you find stuff that's otherwise not available.

So Microsoft, Google or Yahoo should pay me to list my information? Interesting idea, but it's way too late for that.

In a "normal" capitalistic agreement, Nielsen is right — they should be paying me. I put out my information, they use it in their product, and they make money off of selling ads near my listing.

But, given where we are in our expectations with the Internet, this will never happen. Users expect to find the best information when they do an online search — not a company-filtered answer to their query.

What good is a resource if it has no good resources? Obviously, it's no good at all.

This is a similar argument for net neutrality. If your access provider can greatly affect where you get your information, your viewpoint is going to be skewed.

I highly doubt Nielsen's suggestion will happen, and if it does, the types of sites entering into an agreement will be low-profile. Would CNN really NOT want to be indexed by Google News? Would Engadget ONLY want to be indexed by AOL (which owns it)? It would be pretty stupid.

Would you accept money from a search engine for an exclusive listing?

I'm gonna make it there. Well, actually I'm already here. In New York, that is.

I'm spending Thursday at the Writing for the Web seminar of Usability Week 2008.

Put on by the Nielsen Norman Group — yes, as in Jakob Nielsen, the guy who provides a ton of super-informative content in his Alertbox postings — Usability Week has four stops throughout the world. Well, it's silly for me to talk about it — find out more about it here.

While I can't credit all of my Web knowledge to the stuff Nielsen teaches, I've always found a way to improve my delivery with his research.

I'm hoping to get a little more "formal" education on content presentation and publishing, considering pretty much everything I know I've garnered through experience doing it … not formally learning about it.

Even though I only graduated from college 3+ years ago, it's not like there was a Web journalism path. The only Web publishing class I ever took consisted of people learning Microsoft FrontPage.

Yeah, exactly. The name of that program just shows how little Microsoft (and many still today) understand about how online publishing.

PS. To my friends in New York who I may not have told I was coming in to the city, I apologize — but I'm only here for the day and driving back home when I'm done tonight.

If you've been paying attention, you might have noticed a major shift in the attitude toward two of the biggest technology companies by a few of the Web's biggest publications/communities.

Last week, after Bill Gates delivered his presumed final keynote at the Consumer Electronics Show (CES), most of the conversation on major tech sites like Digg and Engadget focused on how much Gates has done for the industry, how he's not as bad as his reputation, and generally what a decent job he's done at Microsoft.

It's surprising, especially with the number of Apple fanboys that visit both sites.

On Tuesday, Apple announced a number of new products at MacWorld, many of which have already received criticism and skepticism.

Apple's decision to charge $20 for standard apps for the iPod Touch has a lot of Diggers pissed off.

Spartan225:

This is stupid. Didn't they learn anything from the iPhone price drop? Like honestly how do you justify this? There is no NEW hardware it is just a software update! It isn't even a price reduction like the iPhone, they are flat out saying…hey these guys get this for free….but you guys you have to PAY. This is just ridiculous.

derekvof:

That is absolutely obnoxious that after just spending $400 on a frickin iPod Touch a couple months ago, they want me to drop $20 on apps that should have been there in the first place. It's not about the $$ as much as the insult to those of us who went out and supported them with our hard-earned money in the first place, dealing with all their f!#$@# bugs in the software, and offering feedback and advice on how to make the product better. We damn well DESERVE to get these applications and it royally P*SSES ME OFF!

The new Macbook Air, the super thin laptop with no replaceable battery or optical drive, has CrunchGear's Devin Coldewey arguing that the system is "basically useless."

This is a pretty big shift in online sentiment. Microsoft has always been the big-bad company, suing startups and putting out crappy products, while Apple (and Steve Jobs) are icons to be emulated.

So what's going on? Why has the mood shifted?

My two cents is that Apple isn't thinking enough about what the consumer wants. For so long, they've basically been able to build their products the way they want to and get a relatively small user base to open their wallets, no questions asked.

But the whole iPhone brickgate, lack of commitment to Apple TV, and continued problems they have pricing their products has their users riled up … and looking to Microsoft? Hell, the Zune 80GB has gotten a lot of good reviews.

I don't want to get too much into technology or bashing Microsoft, but it's no surprise that the company is having problems with the development of Windows Vista. From security holes to possible delays, it hasn't been smooth sailing.

But you would think that a company with the money and power of Microsoft would do a little bit more QA with their Vista promotions. When I saw this offer for a free Vista Beta 2 CD, I wanted to check it out, and instead found out that the company can't spell, and even worse, misspells "Microsoft."

Picture after the jump.

Read more »