Skip navigation
Help

Fred Wilson

warning: Creating default object from empty value in /var/www/vhosts/sayforward.com/subdomains/recorder/httpdocs/modules/taxonomy/taxonomy.pages.inc on line 33.

Xavier Di Petta

This morning when I opened my work email, there were about 600 unread messages.

Near the top of the stack was an email from a mysterious person named Xavier. I had never heard of him before. More mysteriously, his email was titled, "Article."

Intrigued, I clicked. The message was brief:

Hi Alyson,

I'll get straight to the point. I've seen several articles on entrepreneurs you've done, love them, and was curious if you would be interested in doing a story on me. Today a profile about me was published in The Age, The Sydney Morning Herald, WA Today, Canberra Times & Brisbane Times. Last time I spoke with the journalist, it has been viewed more than 180,000 times. All feedback I've read about the story has been very positive. I've had offers from several newspapers, television stations and radios but I'd love nothing more than to be featured on business insider. Let me know your thoughts. Cheers!
--
Regards,
Xavier Di Petta

My response: "Impressive. When are you free to hop on a call?"

Other reporters probably have other pitch preferences. But here's why Xavier's message worked for me:

1. The headline was perfect. It was short (easy to skim) and mysterious. Titling it "Article" made me think it might be about something personal. I assumed it was a reader's feedback on a post I wrote, and I always read things like that.

Even though Xavier's email was more of a pitch, I didn't feel hoodwinked. The email mentioned articles I've written, but more importantly it featured articles about him. It wasn't bait-and-switch, the email really was about "Articles."

2. The message was short and direct. Xavier's first line was strong and captivating. It was also courteous: "I'll get straight to the point." He knows reporters get a lot of emails, and he's aware they don't have time or patience to read lengthy, round-about messages from strange people.

3. It was branded. When a startup or person isn't well known, they need to make it instantly clear why their story is worth a writer's time. This can be most easily done by name-dropping big brand names who support you, such as Y Combinator or Fred Wilson, in a pitch. In this case, the big brands were other publications, like The Syndey Morning Herald.

Sometimes using other publications in a press pitch can backfire. If he had said, "I've been written up in TechCrunch, PandoDaily and The Verge," I'd be less likely to write about it; we share a lot of readers. Instead he named Australian publications, which indicates to me that he hasn't had much US press yet. Bringing a buzzy abroad story to Business Insider readers, though, works.

4. There is actually an interesting story to tell. There are a lot of people pitching non-stories. Or they might be stories to someone, but they're certainly not stories to me. If I can't figure out what's interesting about you or your startup, there's no way I can write something interesting for a reader.

When I clicked on The Sydney Morning Herald article, I was sold. The headline read, "Just an everyday $50K-a-month teen." That's impressive. I wanted to learn how he did it, and I bet BI readers would like to learn too. It's also right in my wheelhouse.

That said, his pitch could have been even stronger. Di Petta mentioned another journalist who got 180,000 pageviews for writing about him. That's a detail I didn't need. I'd rather be the one getting 180,000 pageviews by bringing a story to light; I don't want to feel like the good story has already been told.

He could have thrown out other strong numbers instead. (Numbers stand out more than text, whether they appear in headlines, tweets or resumes). Di Petta didn't mention anything about generating $50,000 per month in his email, or the fact that he's so young he had to ask his dad's permission before agreeing to let me publish the above email on BI. I actually liked that he didn't oversell his age though. It makes him seen more confident, like age isn't what defines him (Although it can make for a catchy BI headline -- you're reading this, right?).

Regardless, I'm already impressed with Di Petta, and I'm looking forward to catching up with the wunderkind on Thursday.

Don't miss:

Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.

Join the conversation about this story »

0
Your rating: None

Fred Wilson and Friends

Starting a company is hard, so you're going to need a lot of advice along the way.

There are many entrepreneurs, investors and bloggers who churn out business advice daily, but it's a pain figuring out which sites are worth reading.

We've compiled a list of our favorite sources of small business and tech news for entrepreneurs.

Running the gamut from hilarious, to informational, to controversial, to thought-provoking, these blogs are all must-reads for anyone who's running a business.

Quora

Blog: Quora

Blogger: Any entrepreneur you want to follow, from Fred Wilson to Marc Cuban

Why it's so great: Quora is a Q&A site where experts actually take the time to seriously answer your questions. You can follow topics like "startups" and "entrepreneurship" and people like Fred Wilson or Mark Zuckerberg.  Answers get voted up by by the community so that only the best ones shine. You can find answers to questions like "What is the best way to prepare yourself for entrepreneurship?" or "What are some tips on connecting with high-profile people that can help your startup?"

Sample: "What are some tips on connecting with high-profile people that can help your startup?"

Top answer by Robert Scoble:

I hang around high-profile people often. Here's some things that can help you connect:

  1. Listen. If they say your idea sucks, listen to the feedback, take notes, and ask for contact info. Then go fix the problems, or come up with another idea and demonstrate you listened.
  2. Get to the point. People like Ron Conway are busy. They are wildly rich, so the only thing that is limited in their life is time. You are taking away some of their most precious resource, so get to the freaking point. Don't try to chit chat or ask about their kids or make small talk. Go right for the big ask. They are used to it.

PandoDaily

Blog: PandoDaily

Blogger: Sarah Lacy

Why it's so great: Sarah Lacy and her band of bloggers at Pando are making an effort to become the "site of record for Silicon Valley." Much of the staff came from TechCrunch, so they're well sourced. Lacy conducts exclusive interviews with high profile people in tech and curates the top tech/entrepreneurship stories from other startups in the site's right rail.

Sample: AngelList has Transformed Seed Investing -- Are Recruiters and Job Boards Next?

Last week Naval Ravikant went to an industry dinner. He asked a friend in the venture business how things were going. The friend slumped over in his chair, shrugged sadly and said, “The business is becoming commoditized.”

It’s an extreme interpretation, and not everyone shares it. Times have never been better for a handful of firms who are rolling in the returns, raising as much from LPs as they want and still doing business the way they always have.

But matters have also never been more polarized for the VC-haves and have-nots, and this sad-sack VC has a few people to blame. Chief among them is his friend Ravikant, whose site AngelList has dragged the stealthy, back-room world of venture capital kicking and screaming into the light — something many industry watchers never thought could be done.

And now, AngelList is doing the same thing it did to VCs to recruiters.

LinkedIn Today

Blog: LinkedIn Today

Blogger: LinkedIn curates articles based on your professional profile and your social connections.

Why it's so great: LinkedIn Today curates articles that are fitting for your industry and that people in that industry are sharing. As such, it's a good source of entrepreneurship and business news all in one place.

Sample: Articles on LinkedIn Today:

Hiring Your First Set Of Employees - Greylock Capital

Facebook Testing a New 'Want' Button - Inside Facebook

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow War Room on Twitter and Facebook.

0
Your rating: None

Mark Zuckerberg Laughing

A packed room of more than 200 founders, VCs and internet bankers took a moment to look up from their iPhones and listen in hushed reverence as one of Silicon Valley’s top investors explained what he looks for when choosing the next hot startup.

"For us, it’s all about growth. That could be growing revenues, it could be growing your audience, it could be growing your user base," he said. "And what we’ve been noticing recently is that after integration with Facebook Timeline and Open Graph, companies are seeing just monstrous growth. We tell all our portfolio companies to look into this. "If you’re not, it’s like your competitors are cheating. This stuff is like steroids for startups."

Continue reading…

0
Your rating: None

startup-120wide.pngWant to hear from top startups like Fab.com and Lot18? And NY's top investors? Join 800 innovation junkies at the Startup conference on May 3, 2012! Register now!

LinkedIn NYSE

Last year, the Startup Genome Project was created to "crack the innovation code and increase the success rate of startups." 

Since then, researchers have worked with more than 13,000 companies to determine success and failure factors of startups all over the world.

Startup Genome pulled out 22 findings that show the benefits and limitations of working in different startup hubs. Silicon Valley, it found, was the largest startup ecosystem, followed by New York and London.

The research seems to suggest that Silicon Valley is still the best place to start a company. New York City does have a few upsides though. For one, it has twice as many female founders as Silicon Valley.

And while Silicon Valley has Paul Graham, New York has Fred Wilson.

For more findings and research, head over to Startup Genome.

1. Silicon Valley's startup ecosystem is still much bigger than New York's

According to the researchers at Startup Genome, the startup ecosystem in Silicon Valley is still 3X bigger than New York. It's also 4.5X bigger than London and 38X bigger than Boulder.

2. Companies in Silicon Valley are more successful than anywhere else

Silicon Valley sees 22% more startups make it to scale stage than New York City.

3. Silicon Valley startups raise more money early on

Silicon Valley startups raise 2-3X more than New York startups during the early stages, which Startup Genome calls Discover, Validation and Efficiency. New York startups actually raise 27% more during the scale stage.

See the rest of the story at Business Insider

Please follow SAI on Twitter and Facebook.

See Also:

0
Your rating: None

Max Headroom

Editor’s note: Contributor Ashkan Karbasfrooshan is the founder and CEO of WatchMojo, he hosts a show on business and has published books on success.  Follow him @ashkan.

“I thought the analysis of content vs other video companies very convincing. But I’m curious: the content game hasn’t worked out so well for AOL and Yahoo. Audiences are fickle. Are you predicting a rosier future?” – reader comment in Is Tech a Zero-Sum Game?.

Infrastructure, Platforms & Content

Today, the Web’s infrastructure is built, and we’re filling the pipes with content — mainly free, ad-supported content.

It might seem like the real opportunities are in user-generated content and aggregation, but anyone who’s worked in those fields recognize their limitations: Simply put, marketers want to advertise alongside professional content. Tim Armstrong left Google (the mother of all aggregators) and joined AOL to remake it into the Time of the 21st century.  He didn’t double down on Bebo.

Content is marketing; Marketing as content

Content – video in particular – may be promotional or commercial, in either case it’s a means to an end.

Traditional Media Companies (TMCs) need to make their content commercial; new media producers are leveraging their content as promotional, sometimes giving it away to build value.

However, when it comes to making money directly from commercial content, the genie is out of the bottle, according to Seth Godin: “Who said you have a right to cash money from writing? Poets don’t get paid (often), but there’s no poetry shortage. The future is going to be filled with amateurs, and the truly talented and persistent will make a great living. But the days of journeyman writers who make a good living by the word — over.”

TL;DR

Content isn’t only increasingly free, it’s also short. Godin clarifies: “Shorter, though, doesn’t mean less responsibility, less insight or less power. It means less fluff and less hiding.”

With 60 hours of content uploaded every 60 seconds on YouTube, producers face three challenges:

-          25% of views come in the first 4 days;
-          Viewers only watch the first 30-60 seconds;
-          The average video generates 500 views throughout its lifetime.

It’s no longer enough to be a good storyteller; you have to cut through the clutter and make the numbers work.

The Economics of Content

“Network television costs $50,000 – 100,000 per minute to produce. Reality shows can be cheaper, with the lowest-end costing $6,000 – 8,000 per minute”, according to GRP venture capitalist (and occasional TechCrunch contributor) Mark Suster. New media producers leverage deflationary economics to produce shows for $500 – $1,000 per minute, on average.

My company does it for $100/minute. Once you cut costs down, the real challenge is revenue.

Fred Wilson’s piece on The Future of Media suggested that the right approach is to:

1 – Microchunk it - Reduce the content to its simplest form.
2 – Free it - Put it out there without walls around it or strings on it.
3 – Syndicate it – Let anyone take it and run with it.
4 – Monetize it - Put the monetization and tracking systems into the microchunk.

For example, 5Min borrowed a page from Google’s AdSense playbook, making it easy for publishers to syndicate the company’s video content, on its way to a $65 million exit to AOL.

“But content doesn’t scale!”

That’s the common critique of content companies from the tech industries. The truth is, bad content scales, good content doesn’t scale – the scale comes from distribution and monetization.  Demand Media’s “content farm” model scaled but it has since moved upstream to win over Madison Avenue, realizing that unless your clients are on Wall Street or Sand Hill Road, quality trumps quantity.

Profit is a Short-Term Move; Value is a Long-Term Focus

Content was an art. Today it’s a science as well. It will always be about Influence and Authority.

Bloomberg will lose $20 million on BusinessWeek, Washington Post sold Newsweek for $1 (plus the assumption of debt).  That doesn’t imply that there’s no money in content, it’s a reminder that disruptive innovation can come from new content creators who can be more disruptive to TMCs than any technology ever will. TechCrunch, for example, generated less revenue than BusinessWeek and Newsweek combined but sold for more.

Revenues come and go, after all. However, managers typically don’t care that much about long-term value creation because their compensation is tied to short-term profits.

Goodwill is the Driver of ROI

The best storytellers realize content is about Authority, Influence and building a brand. VCs who made their fortune on software and semiconductors can’t wrap their minds around content (“it’s a hits business”). But despite the 1% annualized return that VCs have generated, they will continue to invest in the latest mouse trap and shun content, despite what the experts say.

The Worst-Kept Secret in the Publishing Business

The Web doesn’t just shrink markets, it also kills sacred cows, in particular Warren Buffett’s argument that “the most important news in the newspaper are the ads”. Indeed, Google outsold U.S. newspapers $37.9 billion to $34 billion in 2011. I know, those are global Google revenues — give it a couple of years.

So yes, content may be king, but it’s the throne that retains the value, even if the throne was seized under dubious circumstances, according to an anonymous publisher: “Many of the big wins in digital content have gotten big by stealing other people’s content, and, once they get big enough, they build an original content layer (…) You can make money with quality content on digital. The challenge is it requires expertise in more than just content development.”

Of course, once you build your audience, you realize you don’t need to create content; licensing it is a more profitable short-term bet, but it creates less long-term value.  Similarly, ad networks have successfully intermediated between advertisers and publishers, but commoditized themselves in the process.

Why Content Has Stumbled

The TMCs actually get it: online remains small, and the faster they embrace it, they faster they die. The issue is how management has a short-term outlook to maximize profits, instead of being focused on long-term value creation.

The irony is that over time, technology plays come and go: One winner emerges from within a given category and largely kills off its competitors. The real threat to content creators may in fact be emerging content companies with no traditional business to defend. After all, journalism is stronger than ever while newspapers are dying.

But TMCs that have their own content catalogs, producers and brands may not see much value in emerging companies, which remain small until they become category killers, just adding to the tragic fate reserved for most.

While we live in a world of “good enough”, ultimately the company that can i) create the best content at ii) the lowest cost possible will create most value over time.

Disclaimers:

-          AOL is the owner of TechCrunch
-          I am not an employee of AOL
-          AOL acquired 5Min
-          My company WatchMojo has a distribution deal with AOL/5Min and YouTube.

0
Your rating: None

healthy_market

Editor’s Note: This guest post is written by Doug Pepper, who is a General Partner at InterWest Partners where he invests in SaaS, mobile, consumer Internet and digital media companies. He blogs at dougpepper.blogspot.com.

Everyone expects startups, even successful ones, to undergo a cycle of hype, disappointment and ultimately growth on the way to a sustainable business. But what about new technology markets themselves? Does the growth of a new market follow a similar pattern?

Fred Wilson recently wrote about the twists and turns that startups face (expanding on Paul Graham’s astute “Startup Curve”). I’d like to take those ideas further and describe the “Market Curve” — a similar path that new markets take on the path to sustainability.

The chart below shows the basic pattern. Markets often experience a “Hype Cycle” of overheated expectations followed by a trough — call it “Facing Reality.” If the market ultimately succeeds, the next phase is “Liftoff.” But troughs don’t end until several ingredients are present. First, there must be broad adoption of core underlying technologies that support the market. Second, there needs to be compelling reference applications to drive mainstream adoption. Finally, there must be a pioneering company, typically with a charismatic leader, that leads the market out of the trough. Obviously not all markets are destined to make it out of their trough.

For entrepreneurs and investors the most exciting element of the Market Curve is that, once the trough ends, strong technology markets ultimately prove more valuable than anyone imagined even during the Hype Cycle. Here are a few examples of how different technology markets fit into this curve.

Internet: Broadband Penetration and YouTube

The late ‘90s saw extreme hype surrounding the Internet but the market was simply not yet ready to deliver. With only five million fixed broadband connections in 2000 the underlying technology wasn’t there. Plus there were very few truly compelling applications. The Internet entered its “Facing Reality” trough in the early 2000’s and failed to live up to initial expectations.

But, by 2005, there were 43 million U.S. broadband connections and addictive applications like YouTube and eventually Facebook. That year Jeff Bezos launched Amazon Prime and convinced mainstream consumers that they could conveniently and safely shop for anything online. Since then, the Internet has proven to be more transformative to our civilization and more ingrained into mainstream culture than ever imagined.

Amazon has surfed the wave of the Internet’s Market Curve almost from the very beginning. Their stock price clearly follows this pattern.

Mobile: The iPhone and App Store

Between 2000 and 2005, nearly every VC firm had Mobile as a core investment sector. And, with few exceptions, those investments were unsuccessful. During that time, mobile networks were slow and unreliable (remember the CDPD network?), devices were clunky and carriers thwarted innovation. Clearly, that all changed when Steve Jobs launched the iPhone in 2007 and replaced the carrier decks with the App Store. And, with more than one billion mobile broadband subscribers globally, the post-PC mobile computing industry is in a “Liftoff” phase that is accelerating beyond wildest expectations.

SaaS: Salesforce.com and Successfactors

When I first joined my VC firm, InterWest Partners, in September 2000, the Application Service Provider (ASP) concept was all the rage. These ASPs offered off-the-shelf software to enterprises delivered over the Internet. However, between 2001 and 2007, adoption was slow because enterprises were more concerned with security risks than the benefits of hosted software.

Over time, Internet security and reliability improved and several pioneering companies, including Marc Benioff’s Salesforce.com and Lars Daalgard’s Successfactors, emerged with proprietary software applications that proved the benefits of SaaS delivery. Today, this market has broadened into a larger paradigm called Cloud Computing with corporations shifting nearly every aspect of their IT infrastructure into the Cloud. This could not have been imagined during the Hype Cycle of this market.

Market Failures: Troughs That Never End

Of course, not every market recovers from its trough. For example, while there are certainly specific nano technologies that are fundamental to many products, a broader nanotechnology market hasn’t emerged. It’s not clear that it ever will. And, in my opinion, Cleantech currently sits at the bottom of the trough. Because of extreme capital intensity, long sales cycles and wavering enterprise and consumer interest in “Green,” this market has become challenged. The question is whether Cleantech will ever emerge from the depths of the trough where it sits today and become the powerful market that John Doerr, Vinod Khosla and many others had hoped.

In the chart below, I show where a number of current technology Markets sit along the Market Curve.

Takeway: Have Conviction During the Trough

The best investors recognize and take advantage of these troughs and the best entrepreneurs lead Markets out of the trough. When SaaS was in the trough, Marc Benioff built Salesforce.com and Dave Strohm invested in Lars Daalgard at Successfactors. When the Internet was in the trough, Jeff Bezos built Amazon.com and Roelof Botha invested in YouTube. In the case of Steve Jobs, he invented a product and pioneered a business model that altered the Mobile market and led it out of the trough. The key is to have conviction about a Market and, as an investor, look for the technologies, products and leaders that will end the trough. Or, as an entrepreneur, launch market leading products and business models to end it yourself.

Marketo is an example of an investment my firm, InterWest, made during a trough. During the late 1990′s, there was a peak of excitement around Marketing Automation with companies like Annuncio, Rubric, Marketfirst and ePiphany. But, the market was not ready. Marketers were not adopting Internet techniques for acquiring customers and they didn’t have sufficient budgets to adopt and implement enterprise software.

By 2006 when InterWest invested in Marketo, the company’s founders believed, and my colleague Bruce Cleveland and I agreed, that the market had progressed along the Market Curve. Marketers had begun consistently utilizing search engine marketing, landing pages, email marketing, and online content marketing … all the activities that are harnessed and optimized by Marketing Automation and Lead Nurturing products. And, the SaaS delivery and business model meant that marketers could quickly see ROI without big budgets or IT resources.

We had conviction that that the Marketo team would create the compelling products needed to lead the Marketing Automation market out of the trough. Today it seems clear that this market will be larger than expected even during the initial Hype Cycle.

0
Your rating: None



Whenever I start my Toyota Prius, I note one number above all else. It's not the time, not the odometer, not even the gas left in the tank. My eyes go straight to the car's average miles per gallon since last fill-up. If I don't exit our vehicle with that number higher than what my wife left it, I have failed. Driving has become a game—and by playing it, I save money and conserve energy.

If only my competitive streak led to greater efficiencies in my far more significant uses of energy: the electricity and gas that light and heat our home. Instead, we live in the dark (figuratively speaking, of course). Our appliances offer no hint of how much electricity they use; my furnace and its associated ductwork operate at some unknown level of efficiency. Monthly bills provide no breakdown of where and when the energy went.

Read the rest of this article...

Read the comments on this post

0
Your rating: None

One of the things I like most about Google's Chrome web browser is how often it is updated. But now that Chrome has rocketed through eleven versions in two and a half years, the thrill of seeing that version number increment has largely worn off. It seems they've picked off all the low hanging fruit at this point and are mostly polishing. The highlights from Version 11, the current release of Chrome?

HTML5 Speech Input API. Updated icon.

Exciting, eh? Though there was no shortage of hand-wringing over the new icon, of course.

Chrome's version number has been changing so rapidly lately that every time someone opens a Chrome bug on a Stack Exchange site, I have to check my version against theirs just to make sure we're still talking about the same software. And once -- I swear I am not making this up -- the version incremented while I was checking the version.


another nanosecond, another Chrome version.

That was the day I officially stopped caring what version Chrome is. I mean, I care in the sense that sometimes I need to check its dogtags in battle, but as a regular user of Chrome, I no longer think of myself as using a specific version of Chrome, I just … use Chrome. Whatever the latest version is, I have it automagically.

For the longest time, web browsers have been strongly associated with specific versions. The very mention of Internet Explorer 6 or Netscape 4.77 should send a shiver down the spine of any self-respecting geek. And for good reason! Who can forget what a breakout hit Firefox 3 was, or the epochs that Internet Explorer 7, 8 and 9 represent in Microsoft history. But Chrome? Chrome is so fluid that it has transcended software versioning altogether.

Chrome-infinite-version

This fluidity is difficult to achieve for client software that runs on millions of PCs, Macs, and other devices. Google put an extreme amount of engineering effort into making the Chrome auto-update process "just work". They've optimized the heck out of the update process.

Rather then push put a whole new 10MB update [for each version], we send out a diff that takes the previous version of Google Chrome and generates the new version. We tried several binary diff algorithms and have been using bsdiff up until now. We are big fans of bsdiff - it is small and worked better than anything else we tried.

But bsdiff was still producing diffs that were bigger than we felt were necessary. So we wrote a new diff algorithm that knows more about the kind of data we are pushing - large files containing compiled executables. Here are the sizes for the recent 190.1 -> 190.4 update on the developer channel:

  • Full update: 10 megabytes
  • bsdiff update: 704 kilobytes
  • Courgette update: 78 kilobytes

The small size in combination with Google Chrome's silent update means we can update as often as necessary to keep users safe.

Google's Courgette -- the French word for Zucchini, oddly enough -- is an amazing bit of software optimization, capable of producing uncannily small diffs of binary executables. To achieve this, it has to know intimate details about the source code:

The problem with compiled applications is that even a small source code change causes a disproportional number of byte level changes. When you add a few lines of code, for example, a range check to prevent a buffer overrun, all the subsequent code gets moved to make room for the new instructions. The compiled code is full of internal references where some instruction or datum contains the address (or offset) of another instruction or datum. It only takes a few source changes before almost all of these internal pointers have a different value, and there are a lot of them - roughly half a million in a program the size of chrome.dll.

The source code does not have this problem because all the entities in the source are symbolic. Functions don't get committed to a specific address until very late in the compilation process, during assembly or linking. If we could step backwards a little and make the internal pointers symbolic again, could we get smaller updates?

Since the version updates are relatively small, they can be downloaded in the background. But even Google hasn't figured out how to install an update while the browser is running. Yes, there are little alert icons to let you know your browser is out of date, and you eventually do get nagged if you are woefully behind, but updating always requires the browser to restart.

Please-restart-google-chrome

Web applications have it far easier, but they have version delivery problems, too. Consider WordPress, one of the largest and most popular webapps on the planet. We run WordPress on multiple blogs and even have our own WordPress community. WordPress doesn't auto-update to each new version, but it makes it as painless as I've seen for a webapp. Click the update link on the dashboard and WordPress (and its add-ons) update to the latest version all by themselves. There might be the briefest of interruptions in service for visitors to your WordPress site, but then you're back in business with the latest update.

Wordpress-update

WordPress needs everyone to update to the latest versions regularly for the same reasons Google Chrome does -- security, performance, and stability. An internet full of old, unpatched WordPress or Chrome installations is no less dangerous than an internet full of old, unpatched Windows XP machines.

These are both relatively seamless update processes. But they're nowhere near as seamless as they should be. One click updates that require notification and restart aren't good enough. To achieve the infinite version, we software engineers have to go a lot deeper.


Twitter-google-docs-infinite-version

Somehow, we have to be able to automatically update software while it is running without interrupting the user at all. Not if -- but when -- the infinite version arrives, our users probably won't even know. Or care. And that's how we'll know we've achieved our goal.

0
Your rating: None