Lightweight Models and Cost-Effective Scalability

Have you even desired to spend less effort or time to get high achievements?  I did, I hope everything can become much easier so I can enjoy more of my time. In Web 2.0 application era, one of the main concepts that O’Reilly mentioned is Lightweight Models and cost effective scalability. Lightweight Models and cost effective scalability means using simple ideas to replace complicated design and development mode, and  develop agile model in order to reduce the standard of technology input, extendibility and application. In other words, “doing more with less” is the main point of this pattern.

One of the good examples can present the best practice of the pattern – Lightweight Models and Cost-Effective Scalability is Yammer. Yammer is the most powerful enterprise social network that provides a private and secure environment for enterprises. The users are provided with functions to create their own groups of networks to communicate and collaborate within their group mates. There is more than 80 percent of the top 500 enterprises and a total of five millions users currently using Yammer to achieve better work efficiency among their team of workers, partners, suppliers and clients.

There are some major differences between Yammer and Twitter. The main function that Yammer provides is private communication within an organisation or between organizational members and pre-designated groups, and it emphasises on expressing to others about the work you are currently taking. On the other hand, when user posts a message on Twitter, the message is distributed to everyone across the network. Also, the purpose of Twitter and Yammer is significantly different because one is for social networking and the other is solely professional.


Indeed, there are several reasons to support Yammer as an application example of “doing more with less”. The target audiences and market of Yammer is only for professional basis. With clear target users, Yammer is able to implement a system that will only fill the needs of professional levels. This clearly shows that Yammer has performed the best practice scale with demand. With second best practice – syndicate business models, Yammer has integrated with a wide range of other companies by using Yammer’s open API, including (an incentive platform), UpMo (an HR talent scouting tool), UserVoice (customer support tool), AffinityLive (project management cloud platform) and etc. Integrating with leading third-party business applications across the globe make Yammer the social layer throughout all enterprise applications. Yammer has become the best choice for active enterprises social network by providing a variety of pricing plans, which include basic free network account with 1 GB file storage, premium group with 25GB file storage, business and enterprise network with bigger file storage and other additional administrative as well as security controls, for the main enterprises social network platforms.  It presents clearly one of the best practices of this pattern, scale your pricing and revenue models.


Bort, J. (2012). Yammer is on fire: 5M enterprise users and new hooks into Microsoft

Risk, M. (2012). Yammer builds on 2011 momentum with strong first quarter

Rust Report. (2012). All the bottom line action

Yammer. (2012). Pricing plans to meet your needs


Leveraging the long tail

Have you ever searched on the web for resources which release a long time ago like movie or music and end up empty handed? I certainly have! But now with Web 2.0 pattern leveraging the long tail, more and more old resources or unpopular resources are rising to the surface. The theory of long tail is that the society’s focus of the mainstream products and market are continuously being shifted away towards the not as popular products and market. The reason for this movement is because a large amount of resources are going online and the boundaries of the physical store shelves have been replaced with a limitless user interface. Web 2.0 technology has taken this theory and expands it to advance the technology features from the previous Web 1.0.

In terms of the long tail, the difference between Web 1.0 era and Web 2.0 era is that Web 1.0 only focuses on producing the mainstream products which is the most popular. However, Web 2.0 also tries to provide information of the micro markets with fewer audiences.  In other words, the use of the design for Web 2.0 can provide a wide range of resources without the boundaries of limited shelf spaces.

A strong example is Rhapsody which is an online music file-sharing subscription service with a database of more than 14 million songs. It also was one of the first music streaming subscription services to launch on the Web. The database of Rhapsody is immense with everything from the latest hits to unknown album cuts. It offers users on-demand choices from millions of songs by using various devices, for example, mobile phones, PCs, Internet-connected TVs and etc. Rhapsody develops the service it provides based on the aggregated information by users including users’ choices, minds, and needs.

Rhapsody is a great example for leverage the long tails because it provides its users with a large database of songs with different genre, age, style and artist. With the large database, Rhapsody has the ability to provide more products, gain more customers and create new market for the music industry. Furthermore, Rhapsody succeeds in leveraging the long tails by providing music sharing function for users. This function allows the users to share music with others and in other words helps customers to gain music information from other customers with similar interests.  Rhapsody also provides different kind of ranking for music to reduce the travel time of information and by different ranking types; different users can choose to only select the ones which interest them. Users of Rhapsody can also produce their own playlists with different heading to identify the specification of each playlist. Lastly, since music files can be kept easily in database warehouse with less storage space consumption, the maintenance and storage cost of Rhapsody is much lower than traditional music industry stores.


Anderson, C. (2009). The long tail.

Gonzalez, B. (2012). What is Rhapsody?

Miller, R. (2010). Rhapsody opens new data center in seattle.

Rhapsody. (2012).