Lost identity: Facebook's Instant Articles

Admittedly, I was a sceptic from the start when Facebook announced its instant articles with its promise to deliver blazingly fast loading articles. The technology would be ideal for publishers who'd want to deliver the best experience to their end users on Facebook. I wondered: why couldn't publishers simply remove all third party clutter and make their own sites blazingly fast? But that is not what I want to discuss here. The Guardian was one of the first news papers to implement the new Facebook Instant Article technology. The thing that disturbs me is that the blazingly fast speed comes at a price: loss of identity.

In recent years the web has become more and more a place where design can thrive. HTML5, CSS3, web fonts… the possibilities are endless these days. Designs of the web outlets of major publishers are on par with their traditional paper-based designs. Which makes that even details in the article's mark-up …

Links as online currency

In his blog, Jure Cuhalev, poses the question: "What do you think about linking? Would you agree to get payed and valued based on number of incoming links to your personal blog?"Well, first of all, my technorati rating is low… I'm not active in the blogosphere and all that… so personally I'd rather not like to get paid based on my incoming links ;), but that's besides the point…. his basic idea is interesting: incoming links may tell us something about our authorativeness.I don't think so…I don't believe that incoming links tell us something about our authorativeness. Let me start with an counter example that dismays, imho, this idea: Paris Hilton. I just linked to her. Does this mean I think she is an authority? No, personally I'd rather  consider her as the anti-authoraty… still, she is famous. For what? I don't know, I don't care, and I don't even want to know more about her. The point is: links are nothing but relations. Simply basing a…

The better interface: Is it about fun, or about identity?

Ryan, at the 37 signals' signal vs. noise blog, quotes an article at techradar about 'Why Apple is great at interfaces when others are not':I like how Nick draws a connection between good UI and ‘fun’. We don’t talk much about fun in usability circles.In the techradar article, elements like the nodding password entry box when a faulty password is entered, and other supposedly minor adjustments to the interface are making the interface more 'fun' to work with. But I'd say that that isn't really about fun, but has more to do with 'identity'? The computer can be made more personal with only slight tweaks. It can be made to have character.Fun to me is more like little features that may make you smile every now and then… that, however, doesn't make a great interface. Character, identity, on the other hand, could. It allows you to get to know the beast in front of you. Connect. Understand. Understandable interfaces make usable, user friendly, machines. Machines you…