winsbe01

Thank you for the advice. I think the sell to cofounders/financiers will go over better once I have the prototype working :)

yeah, that was one of my thoughts too. If it's already been funded, someone must think it's a good idea.

I think a lot of my fear is they are three ex-tech-giant guys, and I'm one guy who didn't even apply in the Valley because I don't think I'm a coding "rockstar".

So, a market sector with no competition? Or is this sector still niche because only one service is addressing it?

Thank you for your response! I really do want to try to build this thing, and it helps to hear that just because I'm up against a huge obstacle, doesn't mean I can't do it.

I wrote a post about why Netflix is actually doing a good thing here:

http://www.bathouselabs.com/archives/yes-netflix-raised-it%E...

i love it! thanks for the link!

build your product. competition is a good thing; dominating a market gives people a lot to gripe about.

plus, having a fairly direct competitor with 100k uniques gives you 100k people who already are attracted by the 75%, and may be overjoyed at the last 25. Just keep going and stick to your vision.

I do this too, although I've never reached out to the developer to help because it usually is already a company. But it's a good idea, I will reach out in the future. Thanks!

yeah, that is the nice thing about it. but still, to someone just signing up, a flash box doesn't scream 2011.

thank goodness! I was honestly preparing to write an article on why and how a multi-billion dollar valued tech company could have a site that wasn't crisp to use or nice to look at. but it looks like pandora beat me to the punch, and that's a good thing!

yeah, you're right, you're not locked to the one _device_, just the one e-reader.

e-readers with apps would solve the problem, but I think that blurs the arena with tablets. a tablet with the Kindle app isn't really different than a Kindle with Angry Birds, right?

I have thought about this as well, and I hope (and think) there will be. The Kindle DRM wasn't a problem initially, because it was one of the first widely sold e-readers with a huge company backing it. however, as more devices come out that can compete with the quality of the Kindle, a change will need to happen.

I was about to type "No one will buy Amazon e-books without a Kindle, and no one will buy a Kindle if they can't read the books elsewhere", but I'm backstepping. The current Kindle business model reminds me of Apple/iTunes, something that makes me shudder. If they can still make enough money off DRM content, then maybe the incentive to make it open is small.

is it just me, or does it look shockingly similar to the Kindle (overall shape, screen size, etc.)? I am a Kindle owner, and love it, my only quibble being the DRM they use. on that front, the 3mill+ public domain books on Google Bookstore is a winner. But I don't think it will be a "Kindle killer".

great answer, and great advice! I think this advice is great for _anyone_, not just people in high school. at least, I hope it is, because I feel moved to "just do it already", and I just graduated college!

For techie non-fiction stuff, I liked both of Kevin Mitnick's books, probably The Art of Intrusion more. They feature (probably slightly fictionalized) stories of creative thinkers who exploited systems, for evil or otherwise. it was very interesting to see how these creative people used their intelligence constructively (or destructively, I suppose).

on a completely non-tech book note, I'm currently reading Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close by Jonathan Safran Foer (author of Everything Is Illuminated) and I'm absolutely loving it! it's beautifully written, filled with humor and tragedy all at once.

just my two cents

what a cool thing to watch. i got a little teary-eyed, remembering my dreams of being an astronaut as a kid. but a bunch of people gathered around my cube at my new desk job, so it wasn't all a sad experience :)

you're right, I'm sorry, I'm confusing the two. I'm just not too fond of the whole owning-something-intangible concept, i.e. patents on processes or trademarks on words. in my distaste for them, I guess I mixed them up.

but yes, a trademark is representative of a brand, and it's important for companies to control their brand image, especially companies who are constantly under surveillance by the media like Apple.

I don't personally like the Apple twist to this article. I think webdoc (having never heard of it before reading this article) is doing some cool stuff with regards to "sharing content" (I can't bring myself to say blogging, because blogging to me means words, whereas this had an emphasis on media). is it perfect? of course not. but I think it would be interesting to see some cool things created using the tool, and perhaps convince other tools to add similar features to compete. it's all about innovation and competition!

EDIT: apparently grammar flew out the window when I tried to write that last sentence.

that is a good question. I'm sure a lot of them are defensive patents, but then you have the whole "App Store" name debacle between Amazon and Apple, and then I start to wonder...

thank you for the fascinating article! I've seen this bug in other places, and I never knew what it was (and usually brushed it off instead of digging deeper to find it).

the number of patents that apple has on things that, to me, seem generic enough to generate good competition and innovation is astounding. and depressing.

it's not that you "should" use one over the other, but evaluate both to see which works better for you. people are excited about G+ because it's new, it's different (yes, lists and circles are basically the same, but their importance to the platform is different), and it's got google behind it, which seems to make everyone get excited.

i personally like it, and enjoy the list/circle-centric nature of it, but if none of my friends are active on it, there's no reason why I "should" use it over FB.

interesting, I don't remember them ever being very prominent. maybe that's just me not paying attention to the software I use :)

I'm not sure if Google will experience the same thing with Circles. I think what will happen (enter speculative mode) is there will be a large group that LOVES classifying their friends like this, and they will stick with G+. Another large group will HATE it, find it extremely annoying/pointless (possibly because of only using one or two circles, like you mentioned), and maybe stick with FB. Either way, people will most likely end up with an account on both, using one actively and one passively.

exactly. i think more people would use the lists if it were a more prominent feature. with G+, they are center stage, so people can easily interface with them.

I said "I like it but don't prefer it to Facebook", but that needs some explanation.

At the moment, Facebook still has the edge because it has all my friends on it. I also am less than 24 hours with +, so I haven't gotten to fully explore. But when more people join and I figure out all its quirks, I believe I will prefer it to Facebook (as I haven't particularly liked Facebook for quite some time now).

winsbe01@gmail.com

you are a saint, good sir.

good read.

after all this talk about who will win, though, why don't we all just use what's best for us :) can they both exist simultaneously? i don't know, but if enough people like each of them, then why not?

still don't have an invite yet...but when i do, i'm hoping to contain all my social interactions there. where has the internet gone when i have a dozen things to sign into and update on a regular basis?!?

true, but with Buzz, everyone was added by default. it sort of sprung up out of nowhere, with everyone rushing to shut it down (myself included). with this, it seems that the privacy can be maintained (at least the feeling) with circles.

I don't know, I think this is a good thing for everyone. With all the hiring wars going on between Facebook, Google, Microsoft, Apple, etc., we're bound to see some really cool advancements from these companies in the near future. Plus, to have something pose as a direct competition to Facebook's core mission is exciting; Zuck won't back down, and neither will Page, and hopefully out of that comes innovation.