This time round however Google made a whole mess with Buzz. In all the frenzy with Facebook and Twitter attaining super star status, Google must have caught the social networking fever.

Not wanting to be left out and not content with merely returning search results from these third party sources, Google drew plans to have its own social network. Unfortunately, instead of doing what is expected and right, i.e. announcing the service and making it available for opt-in by the huge Gmail user base, Google rushed through with its plans and in the process made some silly assumptions.

One of the biggest assumptions was that since a user has let’s say 20 frequently emailed contacts, then it was obvious that you would want to follow them in a social networking sense. I cannot believe it did not cross Google’s collective bright mind that maybe, just maybe, some of those contacts are part of your professional network and not social buddies.

Finding hard to believe this did not come up during some persona building exercise, I have to conclude that they just decided to carry on with it no matter what, with an attitude and then we will see what the users think.

This is wrong for many reasons. First, Gmail has been out of beta now for quite a while and so it is no longer a testing ground. Secondly, you introduce a service and make it opt-in, especially when it is totally unrelated to the initial service, i.e. email. Finally, when privacy is at stake you have to choose the most conservative setting, i.e. after opting in, suggesting to the user to add people in the contact list to the Buzz network, and let the user decide.

The way Buzz was introduced exploited the trust people have put into Gmail.

Personally, even if the approach was right in the first place I do not have space, time, or need for yet another social network, so I would not have switched it on. Having it forced in such an unprofessional manner only hastened my resolve to switch off Buzz once and for all.

In response to the negative feedback received, Google apologized and tweaked the system to be more privacy conscious. However, I expect better from Google, which professes “Don’t be evil” as its informal motto, than to act irresponsibly and then apologize and amend. Unless, the informal motto is just corporate posturing.

Two major limitations of email are that as a thread progresses, the email size continues to grow since each time the previous content is repeated, and that attachments in old emails are made redundant when a new updated email is sent.

The above two issues result in a lot of traffic being generated on the networks carrying the email, and an organizational nightmare for the users.

Google, through Wave, is aiming to solve these issues amongst others by proposing a new system that works more like instant messaging rather than like email. Each conversation is called a wave, and participants to a wave can add new participants at any time. One of the advantages of this approach is that if you get added in the middle of a wave, you will not have to read a jumbled up mess of text to get up to speed with what is being said. Instead you will see an orderly presentation of who said what and in what sequence.

Furthermore, if documents are attached to the wave and updated there will only be one version to view or update, and it is always the latest and most up-to-date version.

Google wave is thus very promising. However, the system can right now only work between Google wave users and so its usefulness is limited.

For Google Wave to be a success, the system must be endorsed by other big players to transform it into an industry standard just like email. Google is making Wave an open source platform so that third party developers can extend the platform. This is definitely a step in the right direction, but more must be done for global acceptance.

So what has changed in the last six months? Chrome managed to convince me and is now my web browser of choice. Why? Easy. Chrome is fast, both to load the web browser and to render web pages. Memory consumption is reasonable. Tabs are treated as separate processes so no single tab can bring the whole browser down. In the last six months this only happened 3-5 times and I only had to kill that particular tab.

Compare this to having Firefox crash on you in a huge ball of fire bringing down with it all your open tabs. Guess that is what they mean by fire in Firefox, rather than because it is fast. It seems that judging a web browser by its name is not a bad idea at all. Take Google Chrome. Just like chrome it is polished, looks awesome, and does not rust, read slow down, with time. Well I know chrome does rust if it is not maintained properly, but you get my drift

Not to mention the awesome handling of downloads, with circular progress indicators, and a dedicated download manager page. The history page is another beauty with a detailed chronological breakdown of the pages you last visited. Tab dragging and dropping is another feature I really like and find useful. For instance, having two Chrome sessions running with multiple tabs open in each. One session is stuff related to project A the other session to project B. You accidentally open a tab for project B in session A. No worries. Just drag’n'drop it over to session B and you are done. Simple but useful.

Password management is integrated perfectly into Chrome. The only issue I had with it six months ago is that it did not manage to import the saved passwords from the SQLite database in which Firefox stores its settings. Thus, I had to enter them once to have Chrome offer to remember them. But if you have a little patience and give Chrome a try I am sure you will never look back.

You might say it is easy to be better than Vista, the latter being such a complete disaster, but I think Windows 7 has not only fixed what was wrong in Vista but gone further and improved stuff that was lacking in all previous versions of the Windows OS.

Cold boot-up time is very fast compared to Vista. I did not bother to time this with a stopwatch, because statistics like 5.4 seconds faster does not mean anything to people, unless they are geeks. But I can confidently say it is fast because you will manage to do less in the time it takes to boot than you would have before with Vista. Windows 7 is also faster to hibernate and wake up.

Stability is awesome. It did not crash even once in the last six months, and I am not an easy Word user. I develop software on this machine, whilst having at least six other applications running, including a browser with on average 7-10 tabs open. Most of the time I just hibernate the machine. No crashes and few reboots in the last six months are both huge pluses.

Memory consumption is another winner here. Windows 7 on initial install consumed roughly 500MB. With Visual Studio and a browser running the system hovers around 1.2GB. This leaves decent space to load a virtual machine or two. Vista is a memory hog, consuming roughly 750MB on initial install.

Not to mention the subtle but oh so productive tweaks done to the task bar. I just love the small live window preview when you hover on top of the task bar icons. It is such a time saver. No need to switch applications to glance at the progress of a rendering or download. Just hover, glance, move the mouse and your work space is back to normal to continue working.

Docking a window to the left and another to the right to view side-by-side can be done without thought with mouse gestures. Drag one window to the left, the other to the right, and voila!

With Windows 7 Microsoft are back on the right track moving full speed ahead.

Blog authors whose blog is read by thousands are a minority. This group of blog authors can be further divided into two separate groups. On the one hand there are what I call subject experts and on the other there are probloggers.

The first group, the subject experts, are what I consider the good guys. They are people who have insights and expertise in a specific subject and write interesting and thought provoking articles. I think they really deserve to have that many followers since the content they write is worth it.

The second group, the probloggers, are the equivalent of a get rich quick scheme salesman. They do not write valuable content. Instead they gloat about how they make six figure incomes by writing online tutorials to teach other aspiring blog authors become popular and rich online just like they did. They also offer personalized consultancy to other blog authors on how to become a problogger too.

If something feels to good to be true, most probably it is not true. Everybody should know this by now. Yet these probloggers still manage to rake in money from people who still think that they can make money online from a blog by writing nonsense. If it sounds similar to a pyramid scheme, you are right.

Two things about probloggers irk me. First, nobody with even the slightest sense of proper manners would boast about how much money s/he is making. Secondly, even if you make a living by writing a blog you don’t run around calling yourself a problogger.

Just like any other pyramid scheme, riches are made only by the few at the top who exploit the naivety of their readership. This is done directly when people pay for consultancy and indirectly when new aspiring bloggers start their own blog and make references to their gurus. Inbound links are the equivalent of virtual money on the internet. There are other ways of doing money too, like for instance selling e-books that cliam to give you step by step instructions to become rich with your own blog. Another method is using problogger conferences during which the few who make money take pictures together to show off on their blogs, whilst the masses pay hard earned money hoping to learn and mingle with the established probloggers.

Why did I write this post? Well, because I think if it only helps a handful of people see things for what they really are this blog post would have achieved its aim.

My first reactions when I heard about twitter and what it is all about were what’s the point. Why invent yet another medium which facilitates yet more nonsense being written. As if the internet is not already chock full of gibberish and repetitions.

They claim that twitter is a revolution in the way people communicate and is providing a new medium where people can express their views on any topic, from religion to politics, to venting frustration at products or lack of support.

The point is that the majority of users on twitter start of strong, as in the rate of tweets not quality content, and then after a week or two, at the most a month suddenly forget all about twitter. Then there are the A listers, people who where popular even before facebook came around. These follow a few people, maybe a hundred, but have 10K+ followers.

Problem is that in 140 characters not even really interesting people such as Joel Spolsky, Jeff Atwood, and Matt Cutts, who normally publish quality posts on their blogs, manage to say really interesting stuff on twitter. I don’t blame them, who can?

If I am interested in following someone’s thoughts and they have a blog it is easy for me to subscribe to their RSS feed, especially using Google Reader. Setting up a blog is very simple and there are sites like wordpress which make it point and click easy.

So you might say just don’t use twitter and be done, what is your problem?

My reply is, yes I did create an account to see for myself what twitter is all about before expressing my opinion and I have to say I only confirmed my initial feelings. In fact, as of today I deleted my twitter account.

The problem with services like twitter is not with the service itself but with the fact that it actually garners support just because it is hyped, millions of people are on twitter and it is free. What worries is the fact that companies like twitter get funding. The only way twitter can make money is if it starts charging for accounts, or includes ads and charges for them, or charges for official corporate accounts to be used as official support channels.

The first option would result in a mass exodus of users, the second option is not really palatable and I doubt it would work for twitter. The third option might make sense but if I have a complaint about a product I would rather go straight to the source rather than just tweet about it in the hope that someone from the company is following certain keywords on twitter.

So yes personally I think twitter is a big shiny over inflated red bubble and would not recommend people use it. As for the industry, I hope that after the latest global economic experience and the first internet bubble investors used more grey matter before they invest in over-hyped useless technology.

As usual I kept on thinking on why a user using FF should decide to switch over to Chrome. Granted Chrome has a harder time penetrating the market since the browsers are now more mature. However, as usual there is always room for improvement.

For example, FF sucks up huge amounts of memory for no apparent reason. I usually keep FF open all day and hover between 8 tabs open at a time. Nonetheless this does not justify consuming over 200MB. And no I do not have a single add-on installed or shaky third party plug-in.

Even if that was the case, the browser should take care of that.

So to give Chrome a second chance, since the last time I tried it was months ago, today I decided to learn a bit more about how it works and the motivation behind it. For a quick introduction, this comic book style look at the technology and motivation for Chrome is great.

I agree completely with what the Google guys are trying to do with the web browser. The browser has to behave more like an OS, with proper process and memory management. As they outline, having the browser crash while editing an online document or email is a big deal.

So next, I decided to take Chrome for a spin once again. Plus points, minimalist design, better memory consumption, faster to load. On this last point I would need more time to see how it fares after three months worth of browsing history.

At this point I decided to import the FF3.5 settings, especially the saved passwords. Without those it would be a pain to initially re-enter all passwords I use. So I clicked on the wrench icon, clicked import, chose Firefox along with the option to import passwords. Everything seemed to work fine. I then browsed to one of my daily sites, and the login and password fields remained empty.

Quick search on Google returned “Chrome won’t import passwords from Firefox 3.5” support question. It seems Chrome cannot import passwords when they are saved in the sqlite database used to store FF settings.

Now, since I am a geek and want to try Chrome I will use it anyway, but what about the millions of Firefox users out there. The conversion funnel does not look rosy if after getting a percentage amount of users to download Chrome they discover that their passwords are not available. Those users will uninstall Chrome as quickly as they downloaded it.

This surely is affecting the adoption rate of Chrome. If I were Google I would give it high priority. I think Google Chrome is a great innovative browser so it would be a shame if adoption was suffering cause of a minor glitch in those important early minutes when a user is experimenting with a new product.

He doesn’t of course base himself on those statistics to say Chrome’s market share is increasing, but quotes figures from Net Applications, StatCounter, and Clicky. They all put Chrome’s share around 3.5%. That’s all good and positive. More competition always leads to better products in the end.

However, I do not agree with Matt Cutts that “That’s pretty good for 12 months”. Why so? Well the Google homepage happens to be one of the most visited sites on the internet, not counting all the other domains, sub-domains, services, and of course YouTube.

Chrome was heavily promoted on these websites and yet after a year only 3.5% of people use it. I personally use Firefox, but do not consider myself a fanboy, in the sense that if something much better pops up I would switch without hesitation.

But it must be said that Firefox have managed the highly improbable with their web browser. Being the underdog at a time when Internet Explorer reigned supreme with over 85% share they steadily ate more of the pie to now being the dominant player putting Internet Explorer in second place.

I agree with Matt Cutts that Chrome is helping drive innovation, such as private browsing and un/dockable tabs, not to mention better speed and secure browsing. But saying 3.5% share is pretty good after a whole year of Google promotion (read millions of visitors) could have only been said by a fanboy

BookmarkManager is browser independent, portable (can be installed on USB pen / thumb drive), and supports bookmarking of websites, documents, files, folders, and program shortcuts. Fast search as you type and easy sharing of bookmarks with friends and colleagues through inbuilt Gmail support are two more features that complement the functionality of BookmarkManager.

The free unlicensed version of BookmarkManager is fully functional. The only limitation is that of launching 10 items per day. For power users who need to remove this restriction a license key can be purchased for only $29.99.

Unfortunately the bookmark management functionality of all major web browsers is below par. Add to that the fact that the bookmarks are locked in one browser on one machine and the lack of flexibility will drive you nuts.

This has been a pain point for me for quite some time now. So after searching the web far and wide for proper third party bookmark management solutions I concluded the best thing was to develop a proper bookmark manager from scratch.

How about a bookmark manager that is portable, i.e. can be used from a USB / thumb / pen drive, browser independent, does not constrain the user to use hierarchical folders but instead supports labels, has blazingly fast search, and can be accessed and bookmarks added with global hotkeys. Of course, standard features like import from all major web browsers are supported as well.

And why stop there? How many times daily do you have to double-click multiple times in Windows Explorer to open a particular folder? How many times daily do you navigate folders to open a document or project your are currently working on?

So on top of all the features I mentioned above I added support for bookmarking local files, folders, and applications on your computer for quick and easy access. Just drag and drop your frequently used files and folders to create a handy bookmark.

All of this functionality is part of the new FruitfulTime product named BookmarkManager.

You can say you first heard about FruitfulTime BookmarkManager here

Check out the FruitfulTime website tomorrow to grab your copy of BookmarkManager.