I also wonder if people might ask at some point what this openid thing actually is they keep seeing on several sites (assuming more and more sites provide it). Then also mainstream media might jump on that train and explain it to the masses.

BTW, services using Fb connect might also restrict their users to the FB TOS. Maybe also not something you want.

@Brad: right, there are still issues.. and you can either give them the possibility to use more than one openid for their account or (I think that’s what you mean) to give them access via their email.

OpenID does have some issues, but all it would take is for Google to start issuing and/or accepting them, and that would crack Facebook’s strategy in one fell swoop. Google is much more likely to be enlightened on this issue and people view them with less suspicion than they do Facebook, which is patently predaceous.

Steve Repetti Re: Service providers not groking that they don’t “lose control”. You are SO right about that. But I think in time it will get through. It took a long time for retail merchants to understand general credit cards like Visa and MasterCard. Then at some point they finally realized that the name of the game was making it easy for people to buy things.

I think for OpenID to be successful there needs to be some organization behind it with some money that does marketing and most importantly educates and provides implementation support to service providers. It has so much going for it in terms of simplicity for the end user AND the services that act as consumers.

The best thing, in my opinion, is to get to people who are just starting to build services and try to convince them to at least offer it. The people who don’t “get it” won’t get it until they see someone else be successful with it. We are starting to see some of that now.

“Facebook Connect” - everybody can understand, that’s about connecting with Facebook.

“OpenID” - well open? is that secure? I don’t want my ID to be open. Aehm - which ID do you mean? What does ID stand for?

The brand name is to much confusing, from what I experience when I talk to non-geeks about OpenID. Sure - let’s promote a brand - let’s skip all the confusing stuff around it — but is it the right name?

Also service providers need to learn that when I sign up to a different service, I am not lost for the previous one. Or you can also say: The easier it is to move means that it’s also easier to get new users.

I think that IS the VERY REASONABLE answer. As far as “control,” service providers still haven’t grocked the idea that somebody else can be the base repository and it still works perfectly with their services without them giving something up. Time, educaton, and market pressure — they’ll eventually get it!

I think the name simply needs to show up everywhere with some link to what it actually is, explained for normal users.

I think OpenID providers should also make very clear to their users what their OpenID is and how they can use it. That fits well into your point about education. I see it more though that not providers need to be educated but providers need to educate their users. They also have the power to do that (esp. Google and Yahoo with their userbase).

Thanks for your comment!

And, there’s another selfish reason too. Providers hate to “give up control” and they think that’s what’s happening — even though it’s not true.

I would agree with your proposals, but add: education of providers as well. Not sure how likely we are to get only OpenID logins everywhere anytime soon, however I wold consider it a measure of success if the plethora of options were reduced to just one or two!

BTW: great article!