Being in the IT Development industry specialising in Web development, I am always interested in the 'next big trend'. That is, the next piece of development technology that I am going to have to learn and what it's going to be used for. On that note, I came across an article on The News & Observer entitled "3 Internet trends to watch".

The article goes on to describe what in the authors view is the next three themes that will shape the development of the Internet over the next few years. The first trend is as he calls it "the Internet as desktop". This has been bandied about for some time now, but I too feel that this trend is about to take off. He bases a lot of this theme on the introduction of Silverlight , which I too agree about. I think that this theme will permeate the Web rather rapidly, especially by those darned advertisers (which I always block from my browser through a number of means!).

The second theme is about "mashup" where the user is given the ability to take only partial elements from web sites and mash them together with other parts and produce a new piece of content for their consumption. Now, I'm a little worried about this one. Whilst I really can see the benefit for a consumer, but where is the benefit for the Web site owner/publisher who put all their effort into the site? I can see this trend being short lived as the Web site owners start to prevent their site from being mashed so as to protect their intellectual property and profitability.

The third theme I disagree with. Not because of the idea which is fine, but the fact that it will happen in the next few years. This theme is the implementation of search engines that flesh out information with database structure to find relationships between the key word elements of a search. I think that most search engines already try to do this, it is just that there is so much poorly crafted data out there on the Web that it's simply a difficult task to find what you want, because its hard to describe in the same way as everyone else. Everyone has their own way of describing things, and when your descriptions does not match theirs how do you know if there is a match?

Anyway. You head on over and have a read and let me know what you think.

Virtually all development that I undertake is destined for the Web and HTML.  The trouble with the Web and HTML is that to get a great Graphical User Interface (GUI), it takes a lot of design and development effort.  This is also coupled by the usual user download requirements being very high.  That is, unless you use something like Flash.  However, for me, using Flash is really a designers tool and not a developers tool.  It is also restricted in that it's only really available from the desktop.  Thus it is not usable if you are on a Mobile browser or other 'limited' browsing platform.

As such, I have been following with some interest what people are calling Web 2.0.  It is perceived as the second generation Web.  Whilst this is true in some respects it really only means that there is a change in the way that developers are utilising the Web platform.  The main way that I feel this going is in the field of GUI design.

To make a real difference to the user experience of the GUI, we need to radically rework how this Web and HTML thing works together with other technologies.  I was really excited then when I read about the release of SilverLight.

"Microsoft® Silverlight™ is a cross-browser, cross-platform plug-in for delivering the next generation of .NET based media experiences and rich interactive applications for the Web. Silverlight offers a flexible programming model that supports AJAX, VB, C#, Python, and Ruby, and integrates with existing Web applications. Silverlight supports fast, cost-effective delivery of high-quality video to all major browsers running on the Mac OS or Windows."

For me if SilverLight takes off, I think that this will deliver what is expected from Web 2.0.  No longer would the Web GUI be limited to large blocs of text, interspersed with some static images, but it will take on a whole new organic life.  The reason I believe this is simply in the implementation of the graphics.  The way that Web 1.0 currently works is that a graphics is in either GIF/JPG/PNG format, and is of a fixed size and resolution.  These graphics do not scale well.  To provide a GUI in Web 1.0 to a different scale, almost certainly is there a need to provide a unique set of graphics per size and resolution.  This is expensive not only for development and maintenance, but also for the end download user.  However, the interesting thing about the way that SilverLight can implement graphics, is that it can be done through the use of Raster graphics.  These graphics are dynamically scalable on different devices and resolutions.  Have a look at some of the video lessons on the subject here, or have a look at "Building rich Web experience with SilverLight".

I honestly can't wait until I can get involved with a project that will allow me to utilise SilverLight.  I already have a personal project in mind, but that is a couple months away before I can really start working on it.  Keep tuned, as I intend to blog my experiences on this development (hopefully with SilverLight).