9-27: Hypercolor...I mean Hyperreading
When I visited the Mozilla site, I noticed that many of the links lead to various articles in online publication (ei: USA Today and Forbes to name a few). However, within these pages it had a link that would direct you back to Mozilla. So, Mozilla seems to be a central point where you start from and can return to at most points, thus confirming the use of a centrality type map. But I also noticed that on the main page there were various links for updates or free software downloads. I would consider this a map of pattern of use. It would make sense to have your updates and the like visible and easy to access for your costumers.
Similarly, Microsoft has map concerning their updates and downloads. However, it Microsoft has more of a flow of information from one link to another. If you want to learn about Windows XP, you click one link which brings you to another page. Continuing down the line, you find more specific information regarding your question. So, they use a conceptual type map helping to sting ideas and information together. But, Microsoft seems to enclose the user inside their realm like a black hole.
Mozilla has forums for the general public to help one another. Since it's open source, any one who knows programming language can help. While at Microsoft, you would have to browse various tech. articles or wait for a response from a Microsoft representative. Also, the level of interaction between users at Mozilla seems much greater than at Microsoft. However, help may be limited at Mozilla because there is no Tech. support unlike Microsoft. So while each has their benefits, they each have various flaws due to the nature of their companies.
Similarly, Microsoft has map concerning their updates and downloads. However, it Microsoft has more of a flow of information from one link to another. If you want to learn about Windows XP, you click one link which brings you to another page. Continuing down the line, you find more specific information regarding your question. So, they use a conceptual type map helping to sting ideas and information together. But, Microsoft seems to enclose the user inside their realm like a black hole.
Mozilla has forums for the general public to help one another. Since it's open source, any one who knows programming language can help. While at Microsoft, you would have to browse various tech. articles or wait for a response from a Microsoft representative. Also, the level of interaction between users at Mozilla seems much greater than at Microsoft. However, help may be limited at Mozilla because there is no Tech. support unlike Microsoft. So while each has their benefits, they each have various flaws due to the nature of their companies.
posted by Red Head Matt at 11:00 AM
1 Comments:
So in some sense, as I understand this, you describe MS and Mozilla both to set up a flow of info that radiates from a center, but there are two important differences in how this flow operates.
For MS, the flow is directed to and from a center, but information exchange is enclosed, and info flow is much more intense from the center, than to the center (unless you count purchases and requests for help as info, which in a way they are.) In any case, control of information is effected both through the enclosure, and through what kinds of inforamtion it is possible to link to through the site. Is that right?
For Mozilla, the flow is also primarily directed to and from a center, BUT (as you point out) the flow goes outside the site (with the option to come back -- which is what you identify as making it centralized) and with additional possibilities within the site for user to user communication, and for users to direct other users outside the site. This makes Mozilla much less forcefully centralized, but still centralized enough so that you can come back to a center to regain your bearings. Also, Mozilla offers possibilities for information to flow in multiple directions -- where users can provide info to the site and vice versa.
So this is really just a re-statement of your post so far -- to make sure I got it right. The comment is a set of questions I guess -- about what kinds of audiences (users) might prefer each site, and why. And what kind "knowledge" each link structure can create, and whether it matters. When we get to Lessig we will all do some very serious thinking about these questions. Because the design of access to news sites, government documents, libraries (which document "what happened" in our collective past) will be governed by one of these models, or by some other model -- and it will have a huge impact on what we can know and what will remain hidden.
Post a Comment
<< Home