In Dreams
I first encountered 955 Dreams about a year ago when I came across a magical iPad app called The History of Jazz. When I sat down with co-founder Kiran Bellubbi to talk about the app for a TechCrunch story, it was immediately apparent that his vision extended far beyond just one beautiful app.
I kicked off my story with something he said to me: “The shallow experience for a user has to be very interesting. The deep experiences have to be profound.” In the app-crazy world we live in, it’s not uncommon to hear developers attempt to get philosophical. But with Bellubbi, I totally bought it.
And my instinct about Bellubbi and co-founder T.J. Zark proved correct. They followed up The History of Jazz with the equally brilliant On The Way To Woodstock. Both apps got Apple’s seal of approval in the form of App of the Week accolades.
Why We Gloat
5 years ago, I made a bet. Two bets, actually.
The first was with myself. I bet myself that if I devoted serious time to it, I could become a great technology blogger. It wasn’t an easy bet to make. I knew it would require upending my life at the time. And it did.
The second bet was related to the first. I knew that to become a key tech blogger, I would need a focus. As a relatively new Mac user myself, I decided that focus would be Apple. Yes, I was coming later to the party than some, but Apple was still a company at the time that was scoffed at by many. But drawing from my own experience, I truly felt that the company was on the cusp of changing the world. Again.
Kill Hollywood, Not Movies
The fallout from the failure of SOPA and PIPA is just as interesting as the main topics themselves. First, many on the web with loud voices are finally waking up to how corrupt the lobbying/political system is in this country. Second, directly-related, there’s a quickly growing anti-Hollywood sentiment.
The most forceful stance has to be Y Combinator putting out a new RFS (Request for Startups) will one goal: Kill Hollywood.
It’s an important statement and message given the bullshit the MPAA is up to. But it’s also important to separate film, the artform, from Hollywood, the industry.
When Google Met Facebook
Day 67 of the Google Search+ (Antitrust+) debacle. Today brings a few new entrants, notably Harvard professor and security expert Ben Edelman who argues (yet again) that Google is unfairly pumping their own products. Also joining the discussion is my CrunchFund partner Michael Arrington.
Michael and I don’t always see eye-to-eye on things (see: Android vs. iPhone — though note, for the record, that we’re now both happy iPhone users). But here I mainly agree with his premise that Google shoving Google+ into Search isn’t insane or evil, it was inevitable. Further, he cites Microsoft’s IE antitrust case as precedent for why these arguments now won’t really matter in the long run.
I agree. Google is going to face legal scrutiny over their actions, likely sooner rather than later. But at best, this will drag on for years and end with Google getting a slap on the wrist (though in Europe it may be more like a punch in the stomach). The end will still justify the means — Google will be better positioned to compete with Facebook as a result of their actions.
But that doesn’t make them right.
Misdirection, Doublespeak, Non-Answers, And Straight Up Bad Decisions
God bless Danny Sullivan. You should read his latest post tonight in which he tries to squeeze some information — any information — out of Google chairman Eric Schmidt about today’s rather disastrous deep Google+ integration into Google Search. Unfortunately, all he gets are bursts of hot air.
Schmidt tells him that Google would be happy to talk with Twitter and Facebook about integration into the new Search+ features. So why didn’t they do that before, you know, they rolled the feature out? Well, never you mind that. Schmidt refuses to say one way or another if they did or didn’t. “I’m not going to talk about specifics.”
My understanding is that they didn’t. But perhaps more telling is the fact that they didn’t have to.
Both Twitter and Facebook have data that is available to the public. It’s data that Google crawls. It’s data that Google even has some social context for thanks to older Google Profile features, as Sullivan points out.
It’s not all the data inside the walls of Twitter and Facebook — hence the need for firehose deals. But the data Google can get is more than enough for many of the high level features of Search+ — like the “People and Places” box, for example.
Why I Hate Android
Why do I hate Android? It’s definitely one of the questions I get asked most often these days. And most of those that don’t ask probably assume it’s because I’m an iPhone guy. People see negative take after negative take about the operating system and label me as “unreasonable” or “biased” or worse.
I should probably explain.
Believe it or not, I actually don’t hate Android. That is to say, I don’t hate the concept of Android — in fact, at one point, I loved it. What I hate is what Android has become. And more specifically, what Google has done with Android.
One Out Of Three Ain’t Bad…
All we’ve heard for the past year-plus is how Android is killing it. The phones are taking over the world. And that’s true — from a unit perspective. But from an actual business perspective, things are decidedly murkier. Google says they’re making a good amount of money as a result of Android, but it’s clearly nothing compared to their main business. The carriers are doing well too — but carriers always do well. Being overly greedy tends to have this effect. As for the OEMs… well, that’s a different story.
The three largest Android OEMs are Samsung, HTC, and Motorola. Samsung just posted record quarterly profit. So far so good. But HTC just reported its first profit drop in two years. And Motorola just warned that its 4th quarter sales were going to miss as well. When you have to warn ahead of actual earnings, that’s a very bad sign.
So one of the three top Android OEMs is doing well. The other two are doing poorly. This matters because of what it means for the future.
Ifttt Is Like Ifttt For Ifttt
Last week, there was a story on TechCrunch with the title: “Dropbox Automator Is Like IFTTT For Dropbox”. I had to laugh. First of all, it’s awesome that there’s already “Ifttt for X” stories. That’s usually a good sign for a young startup. Second, um, isn’t Ifttt like Ifttt for Dropbox?
The answer is yes. Yes it is. And I’m happy to announce today that CrunchFund is part of a great group of investors that have put money into Ifttt’s seed round of funding. Both TechCrunch and AllThingsD have a bit more on this.
Ifttt is one of those services that has been able to gain some good early buzz among the tech crowd despite no marketing or any kind of real outreach. And there’s a good reason for that — Ifttt fills a need that many of us have.
“Clopen”
This is a great post by Danny Sullivan. For those of us caught up in the iOS vs. Android battle, it can be easy to lose sight of the simple, bigger picture.
Android may be “open” in the fact that other companies can use the source code and users who so desire (and know how) can root it. But from a pure consumer perspective, the Android phone ecosystem is often anything but open. It’s a huge fucking nightmare — as has been showcased once again by the release of Ice Cream Sandwich.
How weird is it that Google just released a new flagship OS and is going on and on about how great it is, but the vast majority of users have absolutely no access to it? Worse, most have absolutely no clue when — or if — they’ll ever have access to it. This sounds like pretty much the opposite of being “open” to me.
Even stranger, this even includes the devices given Google’s own stamp of approval. Writes Sullivan:
Out With A Bang
For the past couple of days, I’ve been thinking about what I should write as my “goodbye 2011” post. I find myself doing this every year, with no clue what to write. Do I list my “top” posts (if so, do I do it by traffic or by more subjective means)? Do I list my achievements for 2011? Do I do predictions for 2012?
I’m gonna keep it simple and thank everyone for reading. It has been a good year for me both personally and professionally, and I’m really glad I have this site as an outlet to convey some of that to others.
Recently, some of you have noted that you’re liking the stuff I write here more than what I’ve written in the past elsewhere. I really appreciate that. To be honest, when I stepped away from fulltime duty at TechCrunch, I was a little concerned about losing my voice, as it were. Instead, I feel almost the opposite has happened. It took a little getting used to, but being able to write what I want, whenever I want without having to worry about anything else is really what it’s all about.
And the response has been amazing. Last December, this site got about 10K visits (not to be confused with pageviews — it’s nice not having to worry about that game) — this December, this site will end the month at right around 500K visits. When you combine that with the over 60K Tumblr followers, most of whom are presumably reading the content in their main Tumblr feed, I’m blown away.
I know this site has had some substantial downtime and access issues this year (alongside Tumblr), but things are being put in place now to hopefully fix that once and for all. I appreciate the patience.
2011 was great, 2012 will be better. Thanks again for reading and Happy New Year.
Goldfinger
Apparently this middle finger thing has touched a nerve.
I honestly didn’t intend all of this to be some free speech debate, or a discussion about why Google still doesn’t understand social. I was just mildly annoyed and found it a bit ridiculous. But these things tend to take on lives of their own. So it goes.
Before I shut up about this and attempt to get actual work done, I did want to respond to what Tom Anderson (the artist formerly known as “MySpace Tom”) wrote. To be clear, Tom reached out to me with what he was going to write beforehand, to make sure I was cool with him posting it. I obviously was. I will never have a problem with someone disagreeing with me as long as they’re not total asshats about it — and Tom is anything but.
But I still think he’s wrong.
Tom basically argues that Google has to remove content like my middle finger image just as Facebook and Twitter and MySpace have had to throughout the years. If they don’t, “it turns into a cesspool that no one wants to visit… sorta like MySpace was,” he writes. (And how fucking awesome is it that he is willing to be that brutally honest about his former company?)
The Windows Phone Problem In Three Words: Way Too Late.
Earlier today, Charlie Kindel, a former Windows Phone GM, posted some thoughts on why Windows Phone hasn’t taken off. Essentially, he blames Microsoft’s model pressuring both OEMs and carriers — so much so that neither really wants to push the platform.
Perhaps not surprisingly, I largely agree with his criticisms of Android. He believes Google’s platform has completely laid down for both the OEMs and the carriers to the detriment of the users (hence, the fragmentation we continue to see). This has allowed Android to flourish with regard to market share, but he thinks it won’t last forever because eventually the consumers will revolt, just as they did against Windows Mobile.
I agree.
Where I don’t agree with him is that Windows Phone is the correct model. I like the model a lot more than Android’s, and I like the OS a lot. But I don’t like the OEM strategy. And I hate the timing.
Howdy, “Partner”
Yesterday, in response to my post about the intrigue behind the new Google/Mozilla search deal, Peter Kasting, a founder member of the Google Chrome team, took to Google+ to respond. It’s a good response that you should read. And the comments are illuminating as well.
But it doesn’t change anything that I wrote.
As David Ulevitch (who I quote in the original article) points out in the comments, nothing Kasting or I say is really in conflict. Kasting is actually just responding to one small piece of the bigger puzzle (which he himself notes in a follow-up comment). He takes exception to the notion that Google and Mozilla are competitors with Chrome and Firefox, respectively. “Google is funding a partner,” he writes (and italicizes for emphasis).
That’s a nice view. I might (and will) argue that it’s a little too straightforward — so much so that it borders on naiveté — but I believe Kasting and many of the other people working on Chrome believe it. That view is why they do what they do. And it’s why they’re great at what they do. They’re not just building a product, they’re helping the web.
But I don’t work on the Chrome team. I work on the reality team. And to ignore the other layers here would be foolish.
Pay To Stay
I’ve been thinking more about Google’s renewal of their search deal with Mozilla for Firefox. It’s fascinating on a few different levels. Most notably: Google is committing close to a billion dollars to bankroll a browser which is a rival to their own browser.
Why?
Well, on the surface, they do get something out of the deal — something quite substantial. Firefox is a browser used by millions of people. Thanks to this deal, it means that almost all of those users will also be Google (Search) users by default.
I don’t know what the exact percentage of searches flowing through Firefox is, but you can bet it’s massive. Google searches mean Google ads shown. This is still by far their primary way of making money. Makes sense. Got it.
Okay, but…
Bile
Last night I came home after watching Michigan’s most excellent Sugar Bowl win and read Matt Gemmell’s follow-up on why he turned commenting off on his blog a month ago. “It was definitely the right move,” he writes. And I agree with all of his points, so I linked to his post from here and followed up with a few brief words of my own on the topic.
This made some people mad.
Above, Fred Wilson says I’m missing out by “dissing” comments, commenters, etc. Not stated in that tweet is that Wilson is an investor in Disqus, a leading blog commenting system (though they view themselves as more — more on that in a bit). I don’t fault Wilson for not mentioning this very vested interest because a) 140 characters is 140 characters b) I know that he really believes in Internet comments or he wouldn’t have made the Disqus investment in the first place. Still, context is important.
Wilson’s blog, A VC, is a testament to the best of Internet commenting. It shows that on a case-by-case basis with some work, commenting can be productive and perhaps even useful. But I still disagree with Wilson that I’m missing out on anything by not allowing comments here. Because, as I wrote last night, the vast majority of the time, comments are bile. Or nonsense. Or useless. Or some combination of the three.
Read More