The Obvious Corp's preview of Medium
medium.com
medium.com
Lift - http://lift.do/ - tagline is "achieve anything" - give us your email. Nothing else.
Branch - http://branch.com/ - was on HN the other day and has a pretty video, but I have no idea what they actually do as a product/service.
Medium - http://medium.com/ - despite the nice blog post, I still have no idea what they do.
Ev & co are undoubtably talented and they're working on what seems to be some cool stuff, but I feel like I've read a bunch of stuff about what they're doing and still have NO IDEA what it is they're doing.
Is this just me?
I feel every so often a designer has an urge: let's just build it and see what people use it for. It sometimes works, but mostly the user just stares at the screen until something distracts him/her, and then wanders off.
Its a small thing, but I'm somewhat turned off by the urls - urls like https://medium.com/c/e2e5df2e6649 feel like something out of an early 2000's CMS...
Hopefully it's just a prototype thing, but you'd think they'd want even these early URLs to be shared with love.
Do you mind expanding on this? I thought hashbangs were a rape and pillage of URI convention.
I was thinking mostly about the clean, namespaced, REST scheme for their API, which you can see at https://dev.twitter.com/docs/api. And it's not just a separate API, as it corresponds closely to the website URLs too.
Generally, Twitter and Digg were the best examples of real-world REST implementations around that time. That people like Oatmeal are making fun of the crazy-long Plus URIs [1] shows it's not just RFC longbeards pontificating about The Right way to build web apps. At least some end-users notice and care about this stuff too.
1. http://techcrunch.com/2012/08/12/google-plus-the-oatmeal/
URI design is hard, especially when you're dealing with a single namespace on a site with massive scale like Twitter. But if everyone has their own namespace (it seems Medium is a good candidate for this), then you could as well use a human-readable timestamp in UTC (yyyy/mm/dd/hh-mm-ss), but they might be an eyesore for some.
The fashion these days tends to be short, mixed-case, untypable URIs that don't look like they'll stand the test of time.
As Ev said in his post this release is a preview and we're not done by any stretch of the imagination.
But I actually really like the look and feel, so I've signed up. I'm sure they'll hammer the issues out.
What is the advantage of posting to this service? Increased readership? Huge font?
I don't see IP terms posted anywhere... Or any reason to be excited about this.
We'll certainly look into this more though. Thanks for raising the concerns!
Honestly, what I'm seeing could be done with a fancy Wordpress theme. A good design does not mean you have a product.
I like the pieces of what's here, but I think masonry is a bit overdone, I personally like a higher information density.
The sorting by quality made it quite interesting.
Combine that with a recommendation system like http://getprismatic.com and it could be powerful.
I'm curious when they will open it up to more bloggers.
Is there something I'm missing?
(Seriously, though, it was just the first thing that came into my head when setting up the other X-headers.)
e.g. add_header "X-Powered-By" "Food";
[1]http://wiki.nginx.org/HttpHeadersModule#add_header
I sometimes throw in these kind of headers for fun on my own sites.
That's what I gather from 30 minutes of an exhaustive all-links traversal, at least.
Blogger (and blogging) brought about short-form personal essays; Twitter brought about ultra-short-form personal messages.
Both have spawned many other uses as well, as people made each their own. But the writer in me loved the limitations each had, since limitations often leads to creativity.
So I'm excited about what Medium could be. Looking at their examples, my guess is they're mashing together elements of Pinterest and Tumblr (and Svbtle). Perhaps they see power in making publishing more visual and flexible. A visually-appealing layout invites a reader in. And there are all kinds of writers - or better - content creators. Some are visual (hence the all-image collections), some are textual, some are a mix of both. Perhaps in the future, they'll offer video and audio too. Well, maybe not audio ;) (cough cough Odeo cough)
Will it work? I think they've got something interesting here, though I don't see a leap that's as revolutionary as Blogger or Twitter yet.
As a content creator, my main concerns are:
+ Is it easy to create? (This is perhaps the biggest concern)
+ Can I express myself in the form I want to? (In whatever format I prefer)
+ Can I be creative in my expression? (Sometimes limitations are good here)
+ Will I have an audience? (The follower system seems to work well here, as well as ways to share to other social media networks)
+ Can I hear from my audience? (Comments, likes, votes, ratings, etc; moderation and filtering is key here)
+ How can my ego be fed? (Creators may not think about this consciously, but all public creators care about their reputation, be it through audience engagement, social media metrics, etc)
Blogger, Twitter, and other social media creation tools offer these to some extent. I think part of Blogger and Twitter's success was how they enabled the first bullet point: they made creating content easy. Ridiculously easy.
The examples Medium offered only show off the final products, so I don't know anything about the creation process. Will it be ridiculously easy to use, easier than Blogger, Twitter, Tumblr, Pinterest, etc? It looks very interesting, but I don't get a feeling of it being revolutionary. At least, not yet.
Perhaps people could create their own 'zines from other people's articles. They choose the articles they like, and then refine the tone and content to form a coherent publication.
Medium seems little confusing at first but as a new publishing platform (over Wordpress and the rest of the old not-so-evolving-anymore), I look forward to participating.
The flagship kudos concept is part of Medium.com as well.