I just read in my Google Reader that the new Spread OpenID website launched today. I think the general idea behind OpenID is a great one, so do not mistake the following comments as something negative towards OpenID. We desperately need something like OpenID in this day and age. The ability to have a single non-centralized login is great. Especially one that embraces open standards. For more information on OpenID, you can look at my own writings in my article entitled All About OpenID.
Now, on to the question in the subject. The new website Spread OpenID, is a play on the SpreadFirefox web site that has been around for quite some time now. These websites are started as efforts to bring the product to a wider audience. They offer up for download graphical icons that can be placed on websites or in forum signatures and so forth as a way of promoting the product. Basically if you really like whatever it is they are trying to “spread” they offer some ways to do it.
My question is, do the sites really work? I mean Firefox is doing fine true, but that was more due to the full page New York Times ad that SpreadFirefox helped raise money for. So while the website itself brought the community together for the purpose of marketing, is it the website or rather the efforts of those behind the website that are helping the products? I guess one could argue that they are one and the same. However, why create a second website? OpenID already has a pretty nice looking website (OpenID.net). Does it really need a second one to explain the benefits and such of OpenID?
Maybe products that have a strong following (life OpenID & Firefox) can benefit from websites such as these. I think that it might be good to revisit this issue in one year’s time to see how much adoption OpenID sees. The hard part of course is determining how much of that adoption was a result of the Spread OpenID website.
Michael Koby 
Michael, thanks for raising that question. OpenID.net is doing a pretty good job – especially since the relaunch – working as the primary site for OpenID. Though for beginners it is difficult to choose a provider they can trust. Especially in Europe questions about phishing and privacy are asked quite often regarding OpenID. OpenID.net only provides a long list of providers – there is nothing wrong about it – but isn’t explaining the features. That’s what Spread OpenID is for.
Of course, you’re right. It’s the people which push projects, not websites.
Michael, thanks for raising that question. OpenID.net is doing a pretty good job – especially since the relaunch – working as the primary site for OpenID. Though for beginners it is difficult to choose a provider they can trust. Especially in Europe questions about phishing and privacy are asked quite often regarding OpenID. OpenID.net only provides a long list of providers – there is nothing wrong about it – but isn’t explaining the features. That’s what Spread OpenID is for.
Of course, you’re right. It’s the people which push projects, not websites.
“I mean Firefox is doing fine true, but that was more due to the full page New York Times ad that SpreadFirefox helped raise money for. So while the website itself brought the community together for the purpose of marketing, is it the website or rather the efforts of those behind the website that are helping the products?”
I’m one of the Spread Firefox creators and I just have to say that your sort of missing the point. It wasn’t the NYT ad at all that helped spread Firefox to more users. We were seeing several hundred thousand Firefox downloads _every_single_day_. The NYT had a circluation of approximately 1.5M at the time. We had two facing pages in section A so it’s reasonable to assume that as much as half of the readers saw our announcement. It’s further reasonable to assume about 1% of those might have gone to their computers and typed in our URL to get Firefox. So, maybe we acquired 5 to 10K new downloads with that ad. My point being that in our several hundred thousand downloads a day, that wasn’t even a blip on the radar.
The NYT ad wasn’t about those NYT readers. It was about our community coming together to do something that had never been done before and that most never even considered possible. It was about showing the world that a community of Firefox fans could compete with the big guys if we wanted to. It was about that community growing its numbers. It was about the project growing up. It was about inspiring our users to spread the word. It was about a lot of things but not about using traditional advertising to gain users.
The website is a platform for community projects that help spread Firefox. Without the platform the community wouldn’t be nearly as effective. You certainly don’t get anywhere without a community, but you also won’t be effective with a community if they cannot collaborate and manage projects.
– A
“I mean Firefox is doing fine true, but that was more due to the full page New York Times ad that SpreadFirefox helped raise money for. So while the website itself brought the community together for the purpose of marketing, is it the website or rather the efforts of those behind the website that are helping the products?”
I’m one of the Spread Firefox creators and I just have to say that your sort of missing the point. It wasn’t the NYT ad at all that helped spread Firefox to more users. We were seeing several hundred thousand Firefox downloads _every_single_day_. The NYT had a circluation of approximately 1.5M at the time. We had two facing pages in section A so it’s reasonable to assume that as much as half of the readers saw our announcement. It’s further reasonable to assume about 1% of those might have gone to their computers and typed in our URL to get Firefox. So, maybe we acquired 5 to 10K new downloads with that ad. My point being that in our several hundred thousand downloads a day, that wasn’t even a blip on the radar.
The NYT ad wasn’t about those NYT readers. It was about our community coming together to do something that had never been done before and that most never even considered possible. It was about showing the world that a community of Firefox fans could compete with the big guys if we wanted to. It was about that community growing its numbers. It was about the project growing up. It was about inspiring our users to spread the word. It was about a lot of things but not about using traditional advertising to gain users.
The website is a platform for community projects that help spread Firefox. Without the platform the community wouldn’t be nearly as effective. You certainly don’t get anywhere without a community, but you also won’t be effective with a community if they cannot collaborate and manage projects.
– A
I definitely understand the point of the SpreadFirefox (in fact I believe I have an account :)).
My question was more to the effective-ness in actually “spreading” the product in question. How effective is a Spread[Whatever] site in the actual spreading?
Community based projects can be successful (SpreadFirefox is actually a perfect example) but is the site responsible for those millions of downloads or is it the word of mouth of Firefox users (like myself). I co-host a technology talk radio show and the host and I are avid Firefox users and we recommend the browser every chance we get (we’ve even done segments on OpenID). So, I work the word-of-mouth side quite frequently. I find the community based projects (be they for coding software, marketing, or hive mind answering of questions) interesting and don’t want anyone to mistake my questions in this post as negative towards such sites.
How effective is a Spread-site as opposed to actual word of mouth?
I definitely understand the point of the SpreadFirefox (in fact I believe I have an account :)).
My question was more to the effective-ness in actually “spreading” the product in question. How effective is a Spread[Whatever] site in the actual spreading?
Community based projects can be successful (SpreadFirefox is actually a perfect example) but is the site responsible for those millions of downloads or is it the word of mouth of Firefox users (like myself). I co-host a technology talk radio show and the host and I are avid Firefox users and we recommend the browser every chance we get (we’ve even done segments on OpenID). So, I work the word-of-mouth side quite frequently. I find the community based projects (be they for coding software, marketing, or hive mind answering of questions) interesting and don’t want anyone to mistake my questions in this post as negative towards such sites.
How effective is a Spread-site as opposed to actual word of mouth?