I am always one to promote the 'read/write' meme and today I noticed a post by Rod Boothby, on what he's calling the read/write Intranet. I didn't see a definition for what this is exactly, but in any case Rod's asking people to vote for the best read/write intranet systems. In the interests of finding out what people think, I've included the poll in this post too (with Rod's blessing - see update #2 in his post).
While I'm on the topic, I'm on the selection committee and will be a judge at the Office 2.0 event, March 23 in California. This is being organized by Under the Radar. Most of the companies below are nominated (along with a bunch of others), so I'm going to be digging into office 2.0 software over the next month or two.
Please contribute to the poll below and let us know in the comments about the innovative read/write intranet systems you're aware of.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.readwriteweb.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2954
Comments
Subscribe to comments for this post OR Subscribe to comments for all Read/WriteWeb posts
I think that for many use cases, Wikis provide the majority of features that many companies need in a read/write intranet.
Posted by: Ray Grieselhuber | January 15, 2007 6:10 PM
Thank you for including the poll. Hopefully, this will increase participation.
I think you are right ask what a Read / Write Intranet should be. And it's interesting to see comments like Ray's above.
Hopefully this will start an interesting discussion. Ray, I am afraid to say I disagree with you re a wiki being all most companies need. The reason why is that wikis do not really have a clear work flow. It's not clear when to go to each wiki page to see what has changed. Blogs are inherently time sensitive. Activity Centric blogs, such as a Project Blog, or an internal Client Blog are much easier to understand. Go to the Client Blog to see what's new. If you have something new about that Client relationship, post to the client blog.
What do you think?
Posted by: Rod Boothby | January 15, 2007 11:07 PM
Could anyone recommend a tool that would allow group chat on the desktop? My idea is to have a company wide system, so anyone could write an IM message and it would appear on the desktop, regardless of what the webpage the user is on. I know there are shedloads of websites for groupchat, or tools like CampFire but the problem is that people are not staying on that website all the time - it needs something persistent like an icon in the tray or browser plugin.
Any ideas?
Posted by: Addeva | January 16, 2007 2:08 AM
Looks like Apple are joining the fold with the next version of Leopard Server.
Leopard Wiki Server
It appears to offer their usual strong templating approach (i.e. layouts looked similar to iWeb/Pages) and information so far suggests an Ajax based system that will work with Mac and Win clients. Strangely the screenshots are no longer shown directly on the Apple site, but are still hosted :
http://images.apple.com/server/macosx/leopard/images/wikiservertop20060807.png
Teams is a revolutionary new way for people to work together. Teams lets people share contacts, resources, information and communicate more effectively—as a team.
More info :
"With Teams, groups receive their own website--an online Wiki Server-- listing the latest news, upcoming events and providing people access to online documents. This Wiki-powered website makes it easy for people within the group to create and edit web page content, hyperlink and crosslink between page and maintain history of all past changes. In addition, this group website provides web-based access to a shared group calendar, and a blog communication and podcasting."
There also seems to be a linked client app called 'Teams'.
Posted by: JulesLt | January 16, 2007 2:17 AM
Should clarify - the latter part of my comment is marketing blurb, not personal opinion. Looks interesting, but proof will be in the pudding.
Posted by: JulesLt | January 16, 2007 2:20 AM
I guess I should have added blogs to make a wiki-blog combination as a nice, lightweight approach to corporate intranets. I agree with Rod about the need for blogs.
Regarding workflow, I guess a lot of this depends on the corporate culture, which may or may not be a function of the size of the company. For companies with flexible, dynamic environments, I think that the heavyweight solutions complete with permissions systems and workflow routing would only bog down the creative process. At companies where imagination is not as valued a commodity, heavier systems may provide a comforting illusion of collaboration.
Posted by: Ray Grieselhuber | January 16, 2007 4:11 PM