A comment to Clay Shirky's article on MS Hailstorm:

To succeed in becoming the standard platform for web services you need applications. I recommend reading Joel Spolsky's strategy letter about this (the chicken and egg problem as he calls it):
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/stories/storyReader$117
Applications is the way to compete with MS. If the open source platform for web services produce better services (than MS) people will choose the open source alternative and become members of that platform instead of .NET This might seem obvious but in the end it's the one thing that decides if users end up in our lap or in Bill's (or is it Steve's).
So how do we do that? Well, except for the fact that open source software is free there are Three things that I think will get people to choose an open source platform:

1. Elastic Anonymity
The default of any framework identification service should be anonymity. This means more than simply choosing an ID. It means you should have a different ID for every service you access. If you need to connect two services to create a third you also create/ get a third ID. When you submit data from your bank account it is tagged with an anonymous ID. That way the service provider doesn't know who you are but is still able to serve you, using very sensitive data without risking your integrity or privacy. Many services, that MS won't dare to implement, are made possible this way.
This might sound messy but connecting IDs can and should be done automatically (connecting IM services with a Jabber Transport is an example). An open standard for connecting services also means there will be plenty of freeware that solves associated interface issues.
Anonymity will create trust for companies and developers who make good services.

2. Opt-in and out.
A service should not be able to connect to another if the user hasn't asked for the combination. A service should also have an "import/ export" function built in so that a user easily can try a service and discard it without risking format problems.
This prevents lock-in.

3. Standardized installation
This is a superset of "2. Opt-in and out". It defines certain criteria for presentation of a service and service agreement and installation procedure. A service provider must present a policy on security, notification, the users access to collected data and the users choices concerning these data. What service does the user get? What does the user give (age, sex, email address...)?
A vague presentation of requirements and results is a classic MS problem. No user knows what to ask, and demand of, MS because they don't understand what MS says/ promises.

Rikard Linde
www.metriko.com and www.sprinterface.com

B