Defining Discussing ‘Social Software’

In the pub last night Matt Webb and myself discussed this subject area: it’s fuzziness and our frustrations with it. The best and most useful definition I have that we got to was:

“Social software = software that’s better because there’s people there”

[e.g. amazon, google, ebay, slashdot, and at a larger scale: the blogosphere and the web as a whole]

Ross Mayfield [who’s blog is a definite find for designers considering social software] has this as an attractive and useful definition of Social Software:

“Social Software adapts to its environment, instead of requiring its environment to adapt to software.”

Seems to me there’s a lot of cross-over with the discussions and thoughts in the experience-design blogosphere about ‘adaptive design’ of the last couple of months.

At the moment, it seems to me, the discussion of social software is massively technocentric, seat’n’screen-centric, expert-user-centric; possibly as an innocent result of those in it’s vanguard. For a real great leap forward IMHO, we need to cross the streams of social software and smartmobs with adaptive design. Expand and map the discussion from:

software-that’s-better-cos-there’s-people-there

to

places-that-are better-for-people-cos-there’s-software-there;

and in both cases have the emphasis on people. I really want the time to try to expand on this, but I’m not counting on it.

“Person most likely”? = Fabio Sergio

0 thoughts on “Defining Discussing ‘Social Software’

  1. Three is the magic number

    The discussion on social software continues over at Black Belt Jones. This was my contribution (n = the number of

  2. The excesses of “Social Software”

    What is it about “Social Software” that is starting to worry me? Is it the abandonment of concepts of ‘online community’ and the complete rejection of familiar terms and paradigms like the message board? Is it the increasing lack of history? Or is it t…

  3. ‘Design dissolves in behaviour’

    I’m getting the picture clearer in my head …Naoto Fukasawa:Good design means not leaving traces of the designer and not overworking the design. If you overdo the design, it will touch the beholder’s consciousness. I think that when people and

Leave a reply to plasticbag.org Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.