Re:The Register slams OpenSocial, OpenID and Google Gears - ...
by maxklein on Monday September 22, 2008 @10:38AM
(#311169)
I wish you guys would see sense. OpenID is a geeks dream; conceptually, it's very difficult for normal people to grasp.
WHY did open Id have to use a URL? What is wrong with me typing [email protected] into my 'openid' field, and then it authenticates at gmail.com using the unique identifier maximusklein?
What's the big difference? One is complicated as hell conceptually, and the other is very easy to understand.
Re:The Register slams OpenSocial, OpenID and Google Gears - ...
by simonw on Monday September 22, 2008 @11:28AM
(#311220)
The OpenID community is working on exactly that:
Re:The Register slams OpenSocial, OpenID and Google Gears - ...
by ricree on Monday September 22, 2008 @12:42PM
(#311325)
Why is typing something like maximusklein.gmail.com and logging in with google more complicated than [email protected].
People keep saying over and over again that open ID is too hard for average users, but I just don't see any evidence that this is the case.
Re:The Register slams OpenSocial, OpenID and Google Gears - ...
by maxklein on Monday September 22, 2008 @01:03PM
(#311350)
Because I know clearly what one is, but I am unsure what the other one is. To me, the URL is a webpage. And it's not clear to me how a webpage is going to log me into another webpage if I am a user.
Users don't see URLs as URLs, they see them as pages, like on a newspaper. So OpenID is based on a concept that alien to users.
One of the future developments I'm most excited about with respect to OpenID is the ability to run your OpenID server on your mobile phone. Phones can already run web servers, and with IPv6 they'll be able to have public facing direct internet addresses. Voila, your online identity lives in your pocket.