Rethinking Walled Gardens, But Coming To The Same Conclusion

from the eh,-no dept

It's become dogma among many that the 'Walled Garden' approach to the web is a failed idea, with AOL being the classic case. So it's interesting to see that some are challenging this idea on the grounds that in a technology's early stages walled gardens are necessary to ensure ease of use among consumers. In other words, according to the argument, a store like iTunes, which made it simple to sync the music store and the device, helped users get used to the idea of digital music. But users were getting their music online well before iTunes; it's just that the labels wanted a walled garden to protect their content. The case of AOL is interesting, because in the beginning the simplicity of associating the ISP with content clearly appealed to a lot of people. The problem with a cash cow like AOL is that the company was inclined to preserve its status and fight the natural evolution towards openness, as opposed to embrace it. So does the walled garden approach make sense in the still-early days of the wireless web? Clearly, the carriers would like to think so, but unlike the early days of the internet, users already know the web's full potential and are spoiled by it. A stripped-down, limited-functionality system will only go so far, as users wait around for a more robust offering. Still, the lessons of AOL and iTunes aren't to be taken lightly; focusing on usability is a good idea, walled garden or not.

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. identicon
    Taylor Walsh, 28 Jun 2006 @ 7:49am

    walled origins

    Not sure what the purpose of the original post is, but the purpose of the walled garden is to own share, contain costs and so have some stability in the model. In fact AOL's walled garden co-existed with the Internet in the 90's (and may yet still do so). As with The Source, CompuServe, Delphi and the first generation of online services, AOL (as Quantum) grew up on X.25 packet networks. More importantly the garden ultimately delivered $20/month x __milion monthly bills. Transitioning out of that circumstance has not been done happily, as you may imagine. iTunes is not a walled garden in any way similar to AOL. It is a cart in the market offering its fare to passersby. AOL's massive garden, housing assorted markets and villages and condo fees, has simply been superceded. "When in the course of online events..." and all that.

Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Special Affiliate Offer

Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Recent Stories
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads


Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.