Crazier things have happened!
Take the World Wide Web for example. In the early years, the Internet was a bunch of geeks hooking up computers and then publishing information using a cryptic network of tools and technology that few understood. Many naysayers said it was a fad and had limited use, but then hypertext changed all of that. Creating the ability for people to view text in a viewing program and then see more text simply by selecting a link to that text changed the way people interacted with the Internet. The World Wide Web turned the Internet from a network-for-nerds into a mainstream, Wordwide commodity.
Years after along comes “blogging”, the geek term for “web logging” or the practice of posting regularly updated web pages containing seemingly pointless information. For the tech savvy, the technology was a streamlined web page publishing system, and again the naysayers said “no” and questioned why people would want to post or read the regular flow of thoughts from everyday people. Years later, blogging has changed the face of the World Wide Web in many ways. It has created new ways of communicating and has even redefined ways of using the Internet. Content publishing will never be the same thanks to “blogging”.
How about RSS? RSS feeds presented a stripped down version of the information presented in websites, especially blogs. People questioned the value and the naysayers doubted the benefits. Website information stripped of it’s design glory seemed like a counterproductive step in the evolution of the Web, yet RSS feeds prevailed and changed again the face of the Internet. When an attachement was added to an RSS feed another revolution began and it was called “Podcasting”.
In the mix comes social networking sites. Essentially a streamlined way for people to make personal web pages with all of the frills already built in. Was Myspace really that technologically different from Geocities or similar free site hosts? Did anyone really see the rise of Facebook coming? Technology comes in all sizes and shapes, but how it’s packaged and presented makes all of the difference.
Now there’s Twitter, years after Facebook, Myspace and blogging. “Micro-blogging” would seem like one of the most trivial developments to come along yet. Limited text length being the biggest restriction but also potentially it’s biggest strength. How is this technology different from updating your IM or Facebook status? Sure, the functionality of Twitter is easily replicated elsewhere, by other services and by existing technology, yet Twitter has millions of users.
What is the common thread? Why does this happen? Simplicity. Any of the previous success stories can be reduced to “simplicity equals success”. Even though the functionality of those technologies was no different from their predecessors, the general public adopted them. The easier something is to use, the more likely it is that people will use it.
.tel allows for the storage of data within the DNS. The type of data is simple but robust. Accessing the information is simple yet flexible. This technological capability is true for any TLD, but for .tel domains, this is all you are allowed to do. The naysayers now say that you can not make money with dot-tel and that because there are so many limitations on what you can put into a .tel “site”, they are useless.
Without a web page or the ability to change specific types of DNS entries, why would anyone use a .tel domain? .tel offers simplicity. Simplicity in it’s understanding. Simplicity in it’s use. If .tel is able to convey this simplicity and it’s benefits to the masses, dot-tel will surely be a winner.
Hopefully for Telsters, dot-tel will be the next huge dot-com-blogging-social-networking-podcasting-feed on Twitter and then the naysayers can blog about that!
.tel = .swell
Friday, February 27th, 2009There are definitely a share of dot-tel naysayers out there. What’s most interesting about them is that many of them are not just naysayers, but outright haters. The emotional outcry over such an issue as a new TLD is quite amazing and definitely speaks for the character of this interesting new online territory.
Dot-tel is different and for some people different is bad. Different challenges their ways of doing things and makes them upset because it’s not the same as what they are used to. Things that are different also create things that are unknown and this can scare people. Generally people fear the unknown so it is only natural that they fear things that are different.
Many naysayers of dot-tel have fairly consistent arguments for their position so here is a collection of frequent dot-tel naysayer arguments accompanied by some responses:
“$300 is too expensive”
It is amazing how many people can not seem to get this right. But here it is, again, although this information is posted everywhere:
1. $300 (give or take depending on the registrar) is for 3 years of ownership and this is only during landrush (until March 23). No auctioning premium domains. First-come, first-served. Equal chance for anyone to get premium domains.
2. After landrush it will drop to roughly $20 per year. Same first-come, first-served basis, like any other domain.
If you are complaining about the $300 it is probably because you didn’t think quick enough to pre-register hotels.tel, newyork.tel and sex.tel, or others. Well you didn’t like them anyway right?
“I could buy a brandable/shorter/better dot-com for that much money”
Sure you could. But you would have to sift through listings and hope you get what you want. In these early stages, for a flat rate, you can get a highly desirable dot-tel and then have it point to wherever you want. You could still buy a brandable/short/better dot-com, maybe even for reg fee, but with an even more generic or desirable dot-tel, you are getting the best of both. ***.tel + prettydecentdomain***.com, over okdomain***.com can be more desirable in many ways. If generic/one-word/premium new domains aren’t desirable then why are they auctioned? Landrush pricing for the premium names is (was) a bargain by many standards.
“You can’t change the domain over to your own server”
No you can’t. This way it is not possible to grab premium domains for $300 and then park or forward them. Telnic would like to see this domain get used, not parked. If they can ensure this and open up the technology to additional servers, then it makes sense that they will. In the meantime, this means no server costs for dot-tel services. So for $300 now, or $20 later, essentially hosting is included. Equal access for everyone.
“You can only store “contact” information”
The naysayers LOVE using these words. Yes, contact information is a key element and a big selling point, but in reality you can store anything you want. You can encrypt it or not. “Contact” information covers URLs, phone numbers, e-mail address, etc. Any and all types of links to any type of device can be organized in a very efficient manner.
“You can do the same with any domain”
Yes you can. No one denies this perfectly obvious fact. But if you do create your own DNS based storage mechanism, then you are supporting the concept. If you support the concept, then for $300 you can have a system that has millions of dollars and years worth of development behind it and a good domain name as well. If the concept does take hold, then the dot-tel domain will have been responsible for that evolution in DNS usage.
“There are no scripts or other goodies allowed”
No there are not because there are no web pages. This particular position is a completely web-based-only thought process. This domain is for storing data, not running scripts or streaming media or other web-based services. Those functions are suited for other technologies that are platform independent. You can still use those things, just not inside the dot-tel frame. If you need web interaction then you can build it for your dot-tel. If you need Blackberry interaction, then you can build a Blackberry app. If you want to speak with live people, you can tie it into a call center. And so on, and so on. Interaction with this domain is device independent, so handling that interaction would also be device independent. A dot-tel could theoretically never be seen by a web browser ever. The onus is on the application, not the domain. This is a freedom of burden, not a restriction.
Dot-tel is meant to compliment existing and upcoming technologies and this concept requires non-traditional thought to embrace. Using a dot-tel completely on it’s own, as a pure directory holder, has it’s purposes, but using a dot-tel domain as an add-on or compliment to other technologies is a whole new territory.
Storing data in the DNS for use by any type of device is the first step towards true cross-platform interoperability on a full global scale. It takes a truly creative developer to realize the full potential of what dot-tel has to offer. Dot-tel uses data in a previously unexplored way and now will be the time when the value of this capability will be discovered, or dismissed.
Dot-tel is different so this may be why people fear it and that would fuel their opposition. Fortunately, not everyone in the World is afraid of the unknown. For some, the unknown represents a challenge. The unknown represents opportunity. When changes occur, unforseen events can occur and that’s when things get interesting.
Tags: .tel, benefits, dot-tel, explaining, naysayer
Posted in .tel Commentary | No Comments »