The new G - should we be bothered?

Sometimes in the world of web design blogs and the internet blogsphere, many things are discussed and talked about. Most of the time these things are really worthy of discussion and provide great insights into the industry. Sometimes however, they are not.

I noticed today that Google had changed its 'favicon'. For those of you who don't know, the favicon is the icon which is shown in the tab/address bar when you are using Internet Explorer 7 or Firefox. Here is an example;


When I noticed this, I thought it was strange and didn't look that good. That was about as far as it went. However, this has been picked up by the blogsphere and has been discussed in many places. Here, here and here. There is also an official statement from Google!

"We recognized there was a need for a Google icon that would better work across multiple applications including web, mobile and client applications. We felt the small 'g' had many of the characteristics that best represent our brand: it's simple, playful, and unique. We will be looking to improve and enhance this icon as we move forward."

Personally, I think there are more important things to write about. Is this really newsworthy? And yes, I am fully aware of writing this post is very, very contradictory to the point I am trying to make :)

Google turns the lights out

Earlier today Google changed their home page as part of 'Earth Hour'. To mark this occasion they made the background colour of the Google search page black instead of white. The idea being that screens which output white require more electricity, so changing to black saves energy, as well obviously signifying that we should all switch off more.

Exciting stuff eh?

Could social networks replace politicians?

Ok, this blog post is a bit random but it came to me while driving my car earlier today. There was a discussion on the radio relating to members of Parliament (MPs) and what they get paid. During the debate the merits of MPs, what they do and how much they get paid. One caller made the point that MPs have very little impact when it comes to policy making and representing the thoughts of the people/country.

There is an element of truth in this. Of course, our political systems work are based on methods which are now hundreds of years old, which is understandable. But this made me think. In the future, will we need MPs to make decisions on policy for us? Perhaps in the (not to distant?) future, we will all have our own unique and secure online ID's (or maybe ID cards, but I don't think it is a good idea to go there...). Using these approved IDs, we may be able to share thoughts and opinions with central government and perhaps place votes. There are huge issues to be addressed in terms of security, authenticity and privacy amongst others, but with the continued growth of social networking websites, perhaps these issues can be dealt with by the 'big players' which have a trust factor and infrastructure in place.

If we could vote using these platforms, or something similar, the voting population could dramatically increase (it has supposedly been in decline for along time). In addition, users would be able to vote on a wide variety of issues very easily and then this could be collated much faster than is possible now. By giving people access to have more of a say, you would be able to gauge opinion far more effectively than traditional methods and have a much better idea on what policies are/aren't wanted (e.g. Should MP's be forced to publish all of their expenses or not?). It would also allow those who are unable to vote, to share their thoughts much easier and contribute to the overall voting figures.

Politics isn't my strong point, so please don't shoot me down for airing some random thoughts here. Maybe this type of process could never work, but it's worth consideration as there are already trials of e-Voting in operation. Why not take the vote to where the audience is? Maybe the social networks could have a more important role in our future than we think...

Bricks & Mortar Vs The Internet

A meeting today with a potential client for some online marketing work (more of which, hopefully in the coming weeks) made me think about the real change that the Internet has made to the way that we do business. After discussing how much a website cost the client, the comparison to the alternatives, is massive.

Many companies, be they hotels or manufacturing companies or whatever the industry, do not balk at paying £10,000 for new machinery, or £50,000 to have a complete shop refit, it's a necessary evil. Yet many companies wouldn't contemplate spending a similar or even bigger amount on their website with a reputable web design company? Obviously this is not always the case, and many companies spend vast somes on money, not only on web design but increasingly on online marketing.

So what stops business owners from spending on their online presence, when they're more than happy to spend big on bricks and mortar? I might seem obvious but it's the tangibility (is that a word) of the bricks and mortar. You can see that you've spent money on something that you can hold. But a website? There are still many misconceptions about what works online and what doesn't and how to build a website which ranks well on search engines. The fact that you can't 'touch' it just adds to the issue.

As time ticks and more people go online, and spend money online, the role the web design company plays in making or breaking all types of business, is only going to increase. It is therefore important that companies understand more about online activities and are better informed when choosing their web designers.


P.S. I mentioned about Etsy recently. Turns out that they're getting one million visitors a month and are looking to improve their service with additional funding from VC's.