• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

Simplicity Rules

Adam DuVander on keeping it simple

  • About Adam

The two types of APIs

September 19, 2006 by Adam DuVander

Two weeks ago we had a good Web Innovators meeting. There were only four of us: Jacob, Marshall, Ryan, and me. The smaller group made for an in-depth discussion about APIs.

We kept coming back to a distinction between whether the API is authenticated or public. Am I getting at my own data or am I going for something aggregated?

Most mashups make use of public APIs. Indeed, data is usually more valuable and useful in aggregated form. That stops some sites from offering APIs, because they fear giving away all the stuff that makes their site tick. Of those who do open up, many use authenticated APIs, which limits the result-set to only stuff associated with one user’s account.

No matter which a site chooses, the question that needs to be answered is how they take advantage of being open. The video-sharing behemoth YouTube has an API, but the biggest way they grew was by allowing people to embed their movies. Somehow the link back to their site made traffic snowball. Pretty amazing. So, while they give away videos on other peoples’ sites, they end up getting more direct visitors through that branding. (Mark Cuban isn’t convinced this is a good idea).

Is the secret to have a widget that is used along-side the API? That’s what Microsoft, Google, and Yahoo! do with their maps. But what do these big companies get out of providing such a valuable service for free? I guess brand recognition and free research from mashup makers is enough.

Ryan said something like, “A good use case for APIs is to ask whether it’s letting users make your service better.” This is definitely a reason for authenticated APIs. Let a user get at the data in their account in new and innovative ways.

At the same time, the authentication ties you to the originating service, much like a widget would in the public example. It’s a partially-open approach, but it seems to work, and you get credit for your service. And that’s really what it’s about, right? If you relinquish some control, you should get something in return. If you’re a mashup maker, that means you should be giving something back. Isn’t that the goal of being open?

Trackbacks

  1. Web Things Considered » The results of having a successful API says:
    September 20, 2006 at 8:46 am

    […] APIs were the topic at our Septemeber Web Innobators meeting and Adam has some notes. On the topic of what companies get out of having an API, if it’s good enough, people will write books about it. We’ve seen it with the Google Hacks and Amazon Hacks books and now the trend continues with a line of Flickr books. I’d argue that this is a good sign that your service has arrived, helps to increase mindshare and gets more people using your service, which ultimately will increase the bottom line. But, again the key here is it has to be from a service that’s compelling enough. So, producing an API to your new web service is probably not important to get in the intial set of features. But, if your service starts to gain traction, you better be considering it. […]

    Reply
  2. Web Things Considered » Web APIs shifting says:
    December 20, 2006 at 10:04 pm

    […] We talked about APIs back at the September PDX Web Innovators meeting, and much of that was focused around building mashups off of these services. I think it will be a real bummer if this trend continues, and less mashup-friendly services are offered. I agree with Dare that a site would be stupid to restrict ways to add stuff to your site. But it also strikes me that controlling the data extraction type of API would be a first step towards limiting a site’s viral uptake (though I’m sure Google’s not to concerned with that). […]

    Reply
  3. Making A Case For APIs | Macala WrightMacala Wright says:
    December 9, 2012 at 6:58 am

    […] useful new tools on top of or increase its functionality or augment content. Currently, there are two types of APIs – open and closed – of which are then sub classified into commerce (of which there are sub […]

    Reply
  4. Making A Case For Retail and APIs | InsideFMM says:
    December 15, 2012 at 5:53 am

    […] useful new tools on top of or increase its functionality or augment content. Currently, there are two types of APIs – open and closed – of which are then sub classified into commerce (of which there are sub […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Simplicity Series

  • Designing the Obvious
  • Paradox of Choice
  • Laws of Simplicity

Copyright © 2025 · Elevate on Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in