I spent last Thursday at the Facebook Platform launch demonstrating an application we developed to integrate with the latest release of Facebook. The new release allows third party applications to integrate with Facebook in an extensive way. They’ve done a great job and I expect that this will open a new market for some very interesting and likely popular applications.

The thing that I found most interesting, however, was the hype and nearly manic buzz-speak. One buzzword I heard repeated again and again was “monetize.” The best I can tell this word is used by those who aren’t making money to refer to ways that someone might make money. It seems to be loaded with the fleeting hope that new web startups have of actually making a profit. To use it in context say something like, “How is this site monetized?” Or, “Please, please, please monetize us.”

Another term, which seems to reflect an outsiders view of social connections, is the “Social graph.” I think it is the term that those who have no relationships use to refer to the concept of relationships. Facebook exposes this social graph. To some at the convention this is a new concept; people know people who in turn know other people. If you’re lucky, you can monetize it.

Just because a back-hoe is more advanced than a hand shovel doesn’t mean I should prepare my patio planters with one. Sure, some day, I may decide to turn my patio into a corporate farm, and I may need a back-hoe. I will also need a large, sophisticated irrigation system. Don’t forget the combines and field hands and foremen and crop insurance and . . . Whew, I guess the planters don’t need new plants, it’s far too much work!

Obviously, I don’t need a back-hoe to take care of my planters. But, when it comes to technology, it is easy to find yourself making decisions that are equally absurd. I am working on a project right now and have been trying to determine what serialization protocol to use to transfer data between an AJAX web client and the server. I was considering SOAP, plain XML and JSON. Before the respective armies begin their war, let me say that I see very valid uses for each of these technologies. I have, however, listed them in what I consider to be their respective order of “advancement” and complexity. XML is more “advanced” in that it is extensible and can be “self-defining.” However, browsers don’t all handle it in the same way and in order to turn it into something useful at the client I will need to parse it first, likely into some sort of JavaScript object. SOAP (being Simple Object Access Protocol) is not really simple at all. On top of XML with many namespaces (not well supported in all browsers), you have a miriad of protocol specific elements. It is very complex, very extensible, very robust as a protocol, but also way more than I need. Using SOAP would add countless hours to my project. That is, of course, unless I choose to use ASP.Net AJAX. I won’t bore you further with my decision making process about that. JSON, however, is very simple, “native” to the JavaScript implemented by browsers and is quick and easy to serialize and deserialize at both client and server. It does everything I need right now, and does it in a simpler way than the other options.

So, I am choosing the least “advanced” of the technology choices. No, I’m not afraid of SOAP or XML. In fact I like them a lot. But, for this project, I need a hand shovel. And JSON is a superb one. Will I need something more robust in the future? I don’t know, maybe, but probably not. And, if I do, I will most likely have more time and resources to invest in the conversion.

I visited The Code Project today as I often do. (Don’t tell anyone but I don’t know everything about computers or software.) Anyway, the page I was trying to access returned this error message. Note the honesty, humility and humor. I’m glad there are developers out there who realize they will never think of everything (an all-too-common illusion in the software industry) and prepare to appease their potentially frustrated users. (click on the thumbnail to see the full image)

Jeremy always says I don’t blog enough. I read quite a few developer blogs, and honestly, most are really boring. I’ll tell you more of what I’ve been doing later. But here is a sample of some of the excitement:

function __reg(p_name, p_type, p_base){
if(!p_name || p_name == “”){throw new TrueException(”InvalidParamter”, “p_name is required”);}
p_type = (p_type)? p_type: function(){if(p_base){p_base.apply(this, arguments);}};
var t = window;
var names = p_name.split(”.”);
for(var i = 0; i < names.length; i ++){
if(!t[names[i]]){
t[names[i]] = (i == names.length – 1)? p_type: {};
}
t = t[names[i]];
}
};

function __wrap(p_base, p_val, constructor){
if (p_base != undefined && (p_val instanceof Function) && /\bbase\b/.test(p_val)) {
var wrapped = function(){
this.base = (constructor)? p_base: p_base.prototype;
return p_val.apply(this, arguments);
};
return wrapped;
}
return p_val;
};

You may comment now.

I am trying out Podpress, a plugin for Wordpress, our blogging tool of choice. Everyone loves Podcasting nearly as much as they love Web 2.0, but nowhere near as much as they love Apple computers which were recently discovered to be made entirely from dreams and candy. Go figure, no wonder they’re so wonderful. Anyway, the mp3 file attached will change your view of all of this as it exposes the harsh realities of the new web. Enjoy!

 

 Hands to Boag [4:01m]: Play Now | Play in Popup | Download