A Parallel with AOL

In the early 1990's there was an Internet company called America Online. It is still around, but far fewer people have heard of it today because it has slipped, unceremoniously, into obscurity. America Online (or AOL for short) provided a custom Internet experience for users before web technologies became commonplace. However, when web technologies became common place, they slipped quietly into the mist of the history of the Internet. There are a number of reasons why this occurred, not the least of which was an unfortunate merger with Time Warner, Inc. However, I would like to focus on two specific elements.

First, they built their business on a propriety layer of Internet technology. When open source Internet technologies became available they were hit by a double whammy. They had to advance their proprietary layer in attempts to keep up a rapidly evolving technology rather than assuming the technology and building on top of it. I think it was Fred Brooks who said that we have to learn how to stand on each other's shoulders in this field rather than stepping on each other's toes. It was good advice then. It is good advice now. And it will probably always be good advice. The other part of the propriety whammy is that developers are generally not interested in relying on a propriety infrastructure for their applications. So, not only did the infrastructure move in a different direction, it took the applications with it.

The second element in their flawed strategy was a focus on the social aspects of the technology rather than the business aspects. AOL provided email, chat rooms, groups, and all sorts of features to enhance the social experience. At the same time, they virtually ignored the business aspects such as online transaction support, group decision support, distance education or any number of other business applications. So, when the fickle social crowd drifted off to their next thrill, AOL was left holding an empty bag.

I say this because I see strong parallels between the AOL strategy and the strategy of Linden Labs for Second Life. In the early 1990's AOL was the Internet force to be reckoned with. A decade later most had forgotten its name. In 2006, Second Life was the emerging name to be reckoned with. I wonder what its status will be in 2016.

A World Created Entirely By Its Residents

Imagine a restaurant that advertised meals cooked exclusively by its customers. Would you go there to experience fine dining? Probably not. In fact, we have a name for this sort of dining experience. We call it a pot luck dinner. Pot luck dinners are not without merit. They provide a social experience. There is usually plenty of food. And the food is generally tasty and filling (meaning high in salt and fat). And people enjoy pot luck dinners, as long as they don't go very often. The problem with pot luck dinners is that ordinary people create relatively ordinary food. If you are going to go to the trouble of getting dressed up and go out, you really would like to experience something extraordinary. You would like food created, not by your neighbor who clips coupons, but by a chef.

Consider another, parallel, example. What if a Hollywood movie studio boasted that its line of movies was entirely made up of home movies. Last year's big success was Sally's Surprise Party and this year they are betting on The Travails of the Bar Mitzvah Band. Would you expect this studio to produce classics of the caliber of The Godfather, Jaws, The Terminator, or Fargo? Probably not. There are television shows that rely entirely on home movies and they are fun to watch. They are the pot luck dinner of the movie industry. But, their cultural contributions are nil. And their enduring value is nonexistent. If you want to see a movie of enduring value, you have to see one that is produced by professionals.

Now imagine a virtual world created entirely by its residents. Oh, wait, we don't have to imagine that. It is Second Life. And while the residents of Second Life do come up with some interesting things, they are the virtual world equivalent of Aunt Betty's creamed tuna over noodles. No matter how good that creamed tuna may be, you get to a point where you can't stand it any more.

I suspect this is the reason why the retention rate is so poor. And yet LL continues to redesign the orientation islands and reorganize the volunteer groups. What is that old line about rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic?

The Tragic Flaw

In another two months, I will mark my third anniversary in Second Life. Reflecting on my experiences over those three years, I wonder how I could have been so far off on my expectations of this wonderful technology. In that time, Second Life has added voice which is good. It has banned gambling which was probably not good as it caused land prices to tank. It is moving adult content to a new continent which is a good idea although handled somewhat poorly. And it has open sourced the technology which is good because it takes control of the technology out of the hands of Linden Labs who do not seem to have the foggiest idea what they are doing and into the hands of people who may know how to exploit it. But, overall, this is meager progress at best.

For their part, Linden Labs has sold a lot of virtual real estate; infuriated a lot of their customers; and dashed the dreams of countless people who saw potential in the technology but failed to achieve that potential for any number of problems most of which can be traced back to poor management on the part of Linden Labs.

Also, during that time, reliability has improved only slightly; lag still persists; inventory still gets lost; and LL seems totally unequal to the task of controlling griefers. In more paranoid moments I have even considered the possibility that the griefers may actually work for Linden Labs. They seem to have free run of the place and perhaps LL sees greifing as a bonding experience for residents. Who knows?

For all my hopes, its seems like the future of Linden Labs is to keep the grid and servers running and to keep adding virtual real estate. All my expectations for future applications in education, commerce, tourism, event management and so on seem to be failing to materialize.

Ignoring the myriad of little problems and attempting to get to the heart of the matter, I realized that the fatal flaw in the Second Life strategy lies in the claim that Second Life is a virtual world created by the residents. This was the BIG mistake. And lest I ramble on too long in this post, I will pick of this thread next time.

Are They Neurotic?

Many years back I saw a show on television about pet store practices and how animal were mistreated. One of the specialists being interviewed said that you could tell how adverse the circumstances were for the animals becasue they developed neurotic behaviors. How can you tell an animal is neurotic? - I wondered. And they answered the question as soon as it popped into my mind. Pointless, repetitive, ritualized behaviors that do not produce a desried result are, according to this show, neurotic behaviors. Well, I thought, then who is not neurotic?

This seems to apply a lot more often than it should to people in corporate settings who attend meetings, fill out status sheets, and have ritualized discussions with their peers, but who do not actually achieve any desirable results. It also occured to me that it was a good description of Linden Lab's product strategy.

LL seems to be stuck in a rut of neurotic behaviors. They revise the website. They redesign the orientation islands. They reoroganize the volunteers. Nothing changes. So, they revise the website. They redesign the orientation islands. And they reorganize the volunteers. Once again, nothign changes. So, I have to ask - Are They Neurotic?