Comments on: This is alpha, baby!

This is alpha, baby!

runkelfinker — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 14:54:17 -0800

calls itself "e-mail for your voice" - it's a new web-based service which combines elements of audio blogging and webmail. Messages can be private or public - at least one bleeding-edge blogger is already using it to make voice posts. And it's been built using Ruby on Rails - so it's got to be good, right?

By: MrMerlot

MrMerlot — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:08:11 -0800

I dunno. It seems to offer the awkwardness of voice mail without the intimacy of email. What do you get back?

By: tweak

tweak — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:12:49 -0800

And it's been built using Ruby on Rails - so it's got to be good, right? I have to agree with trhurler on this one.

By: delmoi

delmoi — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:14:03 -0800

I think the vast majority of cases, text is preferable to voice. Obviously for conversations it sucks (especially when chatting with a slow typer) but for thought-out communications writing is far superior. both to read and especially to write

By: fire&wings

fire&wings — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:14:14 -0800

MrMerlot kind of hits the nail on the head. So awkward. And why say bleeding egde blogger when you can say bleedgeogger?

By: runkelfinker

runkelfinker — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 15:39:43 -0800

For what it's worth, I think the service is interesting insofar as it shows that work on the unified inbox concept (single entrypoint and interface to voice, e-mail, IM et al) is even more immature on fixed internet than it is on mobile...

By: Hildegarde

Hildegarde — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:02:42 -0800

I love Slawesome. I love what it represents; a website that records audio you can send to others means all you need is a browser and a microphone and you're good to go. Anything that simplifies these things for users is okay by me. I tested meebo on a dumb solaris terminal (no hard drive, no downloads) and it worked; I haven't had a chance to try slawesome in those kinds of circumstances yet. If it passes the sunray test, I'll call it a winner.

By: fixedgear

fixedgear — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 16:08:55 -0800

What if the person has a really squeaky annoying voice? In text they seem astute, well-written, you can't help but agree. You click on the link and they have some horrible nasal Long Island accent. What then?

By: 23skidoo

23skidoo — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:09:42 -0800

Some emails will benefit from hearing the voice of the author, and some will suffer. Tonal enjoyment aside, the plusses are increased ability to get certain types of emotions across which are hard to convey in written form, and getting to leave a message for someone with absolutely no chance that you might actually have to talk to them. The minuses are everything else.

By: cell divide

cell divide — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 17:42:05 -0800

What then? Lots of radio people have a 'face for radio'... bloggers who don't audioblog might have a 'voice for text' I agree with the comments above which note that anything that simplifies voice (single inbox) has a future.

By: boo_radley

boo_radley — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 18:14:08 -0800

slawful. It delivers what is promised, yes, but what it promises ain't so hot (agreeing with the "voice for text" thing here). Plus flashblock really destroys this page.

By: BT

BT — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:25:06 -0800

I have to say, the slawsome-powered post linked (by the "bleeding edge blogger") was brilliant. Satire of tech-business bloviation so sharply rendered that I wouldn't have ever guessed that it was parody, except that it simply must have been. Right? Right? Not that this has anything to do, necessarily, with the inherent promise or lack of promise of the technology.

By: poweredbybeard

poweredbybeard — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:32:35 -0800

i think i understand web 2.0 now. give things horrible names. like "blog" or "slawsome." i mean, dear god, are they proposing that people become... what? slawsages?

By: boo_radley

boo_radley — Tue, 18 Oct 2005 19:34:18 -0800

Having listened to the bleeding edge blogger, I'm even more against it. How can somebody spew out so many cliches repeatedly and not realize how bad they sound? If slawsome offered slediting, it'd be better.

By: monju_bosatsu

monju_bosatsu — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 07:08:28 -0800

An audioblogging manifesto. Transcript here.

By: waxbanks

waxbanks — Wed, 19 Oct 2005 08:00:34 -0800

To understand the aesthetic behind Slawesome, you really should take a look at Nivi's page. You might want to bring your sense of humour. The 'Words' page reveals untold truthiness. That is all.