Apache Wins Webby 34
jorr writes "'Presented by The International Academy of Digital Arts and Sciences, The Webby Awards is the leading international honor for the worlds best web sites. The Academy is proud to present The 7th Annual Webby Awards Winners.' Winners listed on this page. Apache won Technical Achievement award."
because of the giant Webby budget cuts... (Score:5, Funny)
So did Penny-Arcade.com (Score:3, Informative)
Wait; Stuff that matters, nevermind, I am going back to sleep.
Apache Wins Webby (Score:5, Funny)
"Pope chosen as #1 Catholic."
Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:5, Insightful)
We give out this awards, and explain nothing, nothing at all. Geez, that's useful. They give you links to the people who won, and the people nominated. Whoopie! Why not tell me something useful, like the criteria that you used to evaluate them (the criteria is there, but hidden away). Why not tell me what the Apache people did to qualify as: "Sites introducing or integrating technology that pushes the envelope, and invite us to believe in what once seemed impossible" .
Great, you took 4 technical achievements, arbitrarily picked one. That's nice, where's some useful content? Personally, I think Google News is much cooler then anything Apache's done lately. Not that Apache isn't cool, but Google's done far more previously deemed impossible things lately then Apache has. At least tell me what you think Apache has done that you think is wonderful?
Maybe they'll release all that information later after some goofy ceremony, but seems like it'd be mighty useful content to give the site some actual value.
Kirby
Re:Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:5, Informative)
And how did Laszlo Systems get nomicated? Their Laszlo Presentation Server is not even a shipping product! Unreleased vaporware does not seem worthy of a technical achievement nomination. Laszlo execs must have some buddies in the Webby Awards office.
And Apache is cool, but is it really worthy of a technical achievement for the year 2002? I know Apache 2.0 was "officially" released in 2002, but the product is not THAT amazing. (I voted for Google)
Re:Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:5, Informative)
A small judging panel would be more suited to giving some sort of explanation as to why the winners won.
Re:Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:4, Interesting)
The Academy Awards I always assumed had more information on their websites about the movies, about what was compelling about them, about who was involved and what was accomplished. During a 2 hour TV presentation, I understand why they do what they do, and to be honest, at least I understand the body of work they are judging. It's contents are the film I saw, with the possible exception of the lifetime achievement awards. Lifetime acheivement awards, they normally spend some time presenting what that person did, and what was interesting about it.
With your vote, you can't write a little blurb about the ones you voted for that you felt you had some area of expertise in? So they could give some quotes (it'd be optional, but I'm willing to bet each winner would find someone willing to say something nice about it in a couple of paragraphs).
When voting for a film, I know precisely what they voted for. If I saw the film, I know the entire body of work they considered. Google. I don't know all the stuff that google does. The news stuff is cool. The searchable images, cool. The weird advanced queries cool. The way cool stuff dealing with the froogle, cool. I know they do all kinds of cool interesting stuff I've never seen, because there's always more cool stuff I learn about google.
Apache puts out the Jakarta project, the Structs project, the Tomcat server, the Ant stuff, Apache server, they put out all kinds of stuff. Apache 2.0 is cool, but nothing impossible. Some of the other projects might be incredible compelling technological leaps, maybe they could ask someone from the Apache foundation for a blurb on their accomplishments for the year. Maybe like a little speech or something?
Kirby
Re:Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:3, Funny)
Sounds like someone didn't get nominated! =)
Re:Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:2)
[OT]Re:Webby Awards appear meaningless (Score:4, Insightful)
How many stories are covered by the AP wire, a freelance, or just a republished post by other people Yahoo does it, CNN does it, I don't read MSNBC, but I'll bet they do it. Yes CNN and MSNBC sends people to gather news, but a lot of them just get news from affiliates or other local news sources and aggregate it just like google does.
The thing most people I know who like Google's news, is that it's very up to date, and that it presents a lot of different views all of them at your finger tips. As such, it's the most balanced, accurate up to date "reporting". I quote reporting, because they don't have any reporters, but they aggregate news in a way that is far more useful then the individual pieces.
The only people who have better news sources, are the people who employ personal news reviewers to give them the most up to date, and concise news updates daily.
Kirby
Well, we know how they paid for it now (Score:1, Interesting)
Bad site design (Score:4, Interesting)
This site fails almost every rule of web design, for fuck's sake.
Re:Bad site design (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bad site design (Score:3, Interesting)
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Other awards (Score:2)
Looks like i wasted my vote in that category on the Pope. Again.
Blow the dot out your ass (Score:2)
On the other hand, it was good to see The CBC [www.cbc.ca] won 3 Webbies with CBC Radio Three [cbcradio3.com].
rathergood (Score:2)