Archive for June, 2006

It’s been made official: thePlatform has been acquired

I’m really pleased to report that thePlatform has been purchased by Comcast. The deal was made public today that thePlatform will stay as an independent unit within Comcast Interactive. Rafat Ali of the popular PaidContent.org was among the first to get the news via a highly controlled distribution of information from Comcast and thePlatform which did not include the actual price. In fact, very, very few knew the actual purchase price and I do not believe that Rafat’s sources are among that group. While it was suggested in that post that thePlatform was sold at an amount that was not most beneficial to investors the reality is that the real figure will not be published but significant shareholders are going to be extremely pleased with the actual purchase amount. thePlatform has a long history and I’m also glad early investors that are related to this deal will be getting some pleasant news that they weren’t expecting.

But, the main thing is that I’m very proud of my wife Tricia who worked hard over the years to bring the customers to the table. I’m also very impressed with the management team at thePlatform who I’ve gotten to know over the years. They are one of the most impressive teams in Seattle…soft-spoken but amazing talent that surely must be one of the best technology teams out there. I’d love to work with any of them again but for now, Comcast has acquired an amazing team of people.

Content protection

IPTV roll-out is moving along but it feels like it is taking forever. There are lots of reasons for that but one of them is content security concerns. A handful of companies, including Seattle’s own Widevine have convinced Hollywood that their solution is up to the task of securing packet based video as it makes it’s way from the satellite dishes to your ip decoder set-top box in your living room. Five years ago, this space was up for grabs and millions are at stake. IPTV provided a forum for small companies to finally start selling products like set top boxes and encryption - which in the cable market was all but a duopoly of sorts. Not very well known outside the industry is Verimatrix. They recently closed another $8 million bucks in financing and are poised to become but a handful of successful video encryption companies who will likely get acquired by the big guys like the new Nokia/Siemens conglomerate. In this case, note that Siemens venture capital is playing along. The last time this happened in the video space, I seem to recall that Siemens bought the company. Ross Cooper and Steve Oetegenn are good guys who have worked hard but in relative obscurity. Verimatrix isn’t one of those companies that does a lot of high profile PR but I do believe that this could very well be a future acquisition target for Nokia and it will wind up being a very happy ending for those investors who paid attention to this little company. My money would be on Widevine getting bought by Cisco as the counter (or precursor).

Start-up founders I’d want as partners

I love to observe start-up software companies in operation and the talent within. And, it’s made me think about who I’d love to have as a partner in any software start-up. In general, I’ve observed that successful companies succeed based on at least 1 of 3 factors in their respective CEO’s.

  • Unusually Charismatic Founder
  • Scrappy, Street-fighting CEO
  • High IQ Software CEO

Assistant professor of business administration Rakesh Khurana, Ph.D. wrote a book titled, Searching for a Corporate Savior: The Irrational Quest for Charismatic CEOs. Khurana drew on interviews with CEOs, board members, and executive search consultants, plus extensive data on the country’s 850 largest public corporations. In short, Khurana said that charisma and rationality cannot coexist and cited German sociologist Max Weber’s own studies on the matter; “Separating the individual from the office is one of the great victories of Western society.” Khurana found no evidence for the charismatic CEO and determined the person at the top matters less than the business situation itself. However, in a start-up environment I entirely disagree. Khurana never mentioned the need for dynamic CEO personas at the varied stages of company growth. Yet, this is something that the valley VC’s have known for decades. What start-up companies would be the companies they grew to become without the Unusually Charismatic Founder? Expedia? AtomFilms? SalesForce.com? Dare I say it? Had one removed any one of these three founders from their posts too early and the companies would not be where they are today.

Which brings me to the Scrappy, Street Fighting CEO. My former boss, Dave Pool, was the founder of Spry. Exactly before founding Spry Dave worked selling seafood for a Seattle fish distributor. Spry first sold fax machines and related office equipment. Then, they sold enterprise software. Then, they sold consumer software. Then, they sold to CompuServe for $100 million. Frankly, Dave is also a charismatic CEO. But that wasn’t his greatest strength. He’s a street fighter. He never had the high profile press or venture capitalist money at Spry. A google search on Pool basically confirms it. Little press but good outcome. He had gut reaction and “chutzpah”. In the right circumstances and to the right degree chutzpah may intimate spunk. But in the wrong situation or to an improper degree, chutzpah implies insolence. I suggest it simply need mean utter nerve and drive. I think Dave demonstrated that you can “force success”. The scrappy CEO does more with less. They achieve with less education or less training. They cut corners in a balanced way that benefits when it all nets out. They find inventive ways to save a few bucks. They compete without the highest paid employees. The scrappy CEO wants it bad. There are also many good examples here in Seattle. Brian McGarvey, founder of MyLackey.com didn’t fade away into obscurity. Most people don’t know he’s now VP America’s for a major division of Vivendi. The Scrappy CEO doesn’t quit until they are satisfied. Often, that means more (work) than 99% us are willing or capable of driving towards.

The High IQ Software CEO is often churned out by the software giants like Microsoft and Oracle. Locally, I’ve gotten to know a few CEO’s (most are new start-ups) like Alek Castro of Pluggd, Josh Hug (formerly of RealNetworks and now working on his own start-up) ,Dave Richards (former Real VP), Steve Banfield at Sony and Marcelo Calbucci at Sampa. This CEO understands the software process very well but also has a deep desire to be a start-up CEO. Typically, they are technically balanced. They could be called Solutions Architects or “Development Architects” because these folks have to master the development tools and frameworks such as Ruby on Rails or J2EE that are available to create the next great MySpace. They also understand the other disciplines well enough. They work with the operations group and provide opinion for the network, hosting servers, redundancy, security and other qualities upon which their application shall be delivered on. But above all else, they are great product managers who have shipped big products. They are technical leaders within their organizations or have strong influence over development teams. The best of them gain influence with peers and customers in the way they communicate—both verbally and in the documents that they write. They build confidence within the team because they solve problems or propose solutions in a studied, coherent way. They are able to balance desired software features with existing and future technologies against a backdrop of the business strategy. They are strategic thinkers in terms of putting solutions into production. Their developers hold them in esteem because they know enough to have useful dialog. These types of CEO’s typically develop the best products that delight their users. But in fact, CEO’s in this category do not get the label without having been battle tested first. Their skills can only be gained through years of experience. In short, the High IQ Software CEO is a geek who has shipped big products and who secretly always wanted to start their own company. Developers sometimes think they fall in this latter category but they do not appreciate the people skills required to be a part of it. Going before a board of directors to defend your position can be a pretty scary experience. They have to keep their calm and respond to many different questions and enjoy the sport of the process. Here, many developers fall short and don’t realize that they do not know what what they never knew in the first place.

Candidly, I’m always on the quest to find partners like this for Curious Office.

Curious Office continues to grow

We’ve been hard at work on ImageKind but we should get the beta version launched on July1 or thereabouts. When we started Curious Office, we did so with the idea that small teams could do great things. In large part, that’s what we believe this Web 2.0 stuff is all about. So, we set out to prove it by developing something ourselves. And, I think that when we release the first version of ImageKind, people will appreciate the fact that it was done by two developers and one designer. I was the designer and I’m not actually a graphic designer by trade so I’m really looking forward to seeing what people think. We started with a basic idea and developed the core platform in about 5 months. There is more to ImageKind than a typical Web 2.0 start-up (in terms of lines of code) so I’m really pleased with the results. I do want to give credit to the other folks on our staff who perform operational and business support including Aleks, Stephan, Jessica and Khanh.

We’ve since put out an offer to a new full time designer who (is VERY talented) and will be starting the second week in July and I’m looking to add another developer partner to the team. We’ve got a new concept under development and we’re evaluating several partnerships with other entreprenuers for 2006. Curious Office is still very much an experiment but I’m pleased with the progress we’re making. I would like to expand the scope of our operations going forward but I want to keep the lab small. The business concept for the second project we want to hatch was conceived by me when I was stuck behind a city bus wrapped in advertising. I’ve mentioned the concept to few venture capital friends around town and was surprised by the investment interest. I’m not sure we’ll need outside capital but it really depends on the final evolution of the business plan.

I’ve got other great news to report very soon but the news isn’t public yet so I can’t fully disclose. I’m anxious to break the news to previous investors and friends.

Mark Cuban has another great idea

I have to hand it to Mark. He knows how to connect business opportunity with relevant timing. Consider that he was one of the few digital media companies to sell in 1999 just before the market melted down. In those days, I’d sometimes sit in on conference calls between Mark at AudioNet and Progressive Networks (the names of the companies before they changed to Broadcast.com and Real) as we’d work on various software license negotiations between our two companies. Honestly, RealNetworks has always been tough to negotiate with and Mark’s company was just one of many medium-large customers of our server software. Not one single person in the room on our end would have even conceived that it could be possible that Broadcast.com could have a bigger, better ending than RealNetworks. Clearly, the story isn’t over yet but Mark sold for $5.7 billion in 1999 and the total market cap of Real as of today is 1.47 billion.

I’d call that pretty good timing.

Now, its announced that Mark is investing in a new journalism Web site “dedicated to exposing securities fraud and corporate malfeasance”. Brilliant. Just as the public comes off the frenzy of the Enron trials and a few years of other corporate scandals, we see this new play to dig up dirt on questionable companies and report on any behind the scenes wrongdoing. The founder of AdBrite didn’t try this exact stunt with FuckedCompany but it was close. America loves this kind of stuff. Some people will learn to review these types of sites before making stock buys. Some will go just to be entertained by all the real-life soap operas. I mean, stories like this one are just good reading!

“…their harassment is relentless. Last week, they had a process server come to my home to serve my wife with a deposition subpoena. Deb is eight months pregnant and the last thing she needs is to be hassled by Joanna, John and their lawyer. What possible benefit do they derive from upsetting my pregnant wife?…”

Reads like an after school special. If America loves anything more than scandalous stories of musicians and actor figures, it is scandalous stories of rich executives working for big public companies.

But here’s what could make this really interesting. We already get television show editors telling us what stocks they do and do not like on CNBC and I am very certain that thousands of people invest accordingly. But, what if the editors of this new website REALLY open it up. Allow members to publish anonymous letters. Internal memos. You get the idea.

Will it be sites like this or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that keep more corporations honest?

An internal email

I just sent out an internal email to ImageKind folks that I realized might make a decent blog post. It’s about a little company I love called Etsy that I’ve followed since the beginning. Etsy is about details and its about appealing to users who want a better online experience. If Web 2.0 is about anything, it’s about how you’ve implemented what you want to implement.

——————————–
Team,

You guys have heard me talk about Etsy before and I’ve taken each of you to their site for various reasons:

http://www.thealarmclock.com/mt/archives/2006/06/union_sqflickrd.html#trackbacks

This link shows they are having success.

These days, there are very few new ideas. Basically, Etsy is another eBay.

The key is to pay lots of attention to detail in the execution. Some who appreciate your execution in terms of feature implementation will migrate over to use your system over others because a) its fun to use and b) it’s easier to navigate and c) the system supports community with other users better than other system

One of the things that I’ve been trying to stress is that a major trend going with online consumer sites right now is implementation and attention to detail. That’s where the battle is being fought. More and more people are used to working with computers and the most valuable user base in terms of online spending keeps their browsers up to date. So, the smaller players are taking advantage of modern browser technology to make richer online experiences than the big companies. Valuable consumers I like are early adopters and younger consumers. They don’t just look at what you’re offering online but how you’re offering it. More than ever, development and creativity are deeply intertwined.

When you hear me going on about improving little details, I believe it is because it is the only way a small site can enter a crowded market. And these days, every market is crowded.

Kelly

Life lessons for technologists in Office 2007

I installed the new Microsoft Office 2007 Beta last night. Almost immediately I was very, very impressed. Anyone that is interested in websites or web applications could probably stand to gain a few interesting lessons from a dissection of at least one of these new applications. I have really only spent time with Outlook 2007 since I’ve installed this but here are some basic themes that are worth pointing out specifically. The lessons probably apply to a lot more than software. For example, some car dashboards could be a lot less frustrating.

Here are some notes I’m jotting in real time as I play with the application.

1) Unlike many previous iterations of Microsoft release attempts, these new graphical updates are not just about looks. Graphics were driven by deep thinking around user habits. Graphics arent just graphics anymore. Aesthetics were supposed to mean something. Now I know why they call them software “architects”.

2) Like many of the new forward looking Ajax desktops out there such as Pageflakes, main chunks of the application are collapsable, giving you more freedom to manage your desktop real-estate. You don’t need all columns visible if you don’t need them. That was a no brainer.

3) Microsoft boiled down the most frequently used functions from lesser used functions and persist them or hide them accordingly. For example, you ALWAYS want easy access to commands like “save”, “undo”, “print” or “new message”. Those commands are at the top of a new, multi-tiered dialog/command area. I guess its called a “quick access toolbar”. As you might expect, it sits on upper top-left. By the way, Microsoft really digested the notion that “upper, top-left” is the internationally understood placement for “stuff you want to see and use first and foremost” for every aspect of this thing. (By the way, I should note that I’ve seen some developers take this concept of “upper-top-left” and apply it incorrectly to some web forms. The reason is because I believe people developed slightly different habits when working on a WEB FORM on a WEB PAGE. For example, if you are filling in a long form or re-editing a form that already had content in it - especially one that requires scrolling down a page - you would expect to find the Save button at the bottom of the form page after you made your changes vs. having to scroll back up to the top of the page. But, this cannot be confused with using a desktop app like Outlook. Differences are subtle but important IMHO).

4) The new “ribbon” area packs a lot of functionality in a new way but it makes sense. Each tab represents a new kind of activity. Clicking on a tab reveals the relevant commands and buttons for that particular tab (activity). The application menu is no longer static. It changes based on what you’re working on. Makes sense huh?

5) Then, notice that “commands” are visibly organized into groups. No more flowing one unrelated command into another. For example, functions that relate to font type, size, bold, italic all live in their own container within the ribbon. The next container is clearly about another set of commands. You don’t need to be told what each container is all about. They are visibly and topically organized.

6) The commands and groups you are most likely to used are organized in ORDER left to right. For example, in Outlook the Message tab is top left. Within that, the most frequently used function (like “Send”) has bigger buttons than lesser used commands. “Save” and “Close” are right in front of you with big buttons. The point? Things you use often are made easier than ever to find using size and placement. (That’s why my TV is big and in the middle of my front room :)

7) When you have more things to choose from, they are available but lesser used things are smartly tucked away. So, more power is actually offset by less clutter. Adobe should do more of this in feature packed apps like Photoshop.

8) Microsoft integrated prominent commands from one to another. Consider that Outlook is several applications in one. Mail. Calendar. Contact. Tasks. Yet, when you are in Contacts, you are very likely going to want to mail someone, categorize them or set an appointment with them. In this new version, those functions are totally obvious via big bright buttons. The applications are better tied together as you move from one to another. After all, calendaring is in part about messaging right?

9) Microsoft realized that email isn’t so much about swapping text back and forth anymore. It’s the collaboration tool for the masses. So, the “Insert” function is no longer a hidden stepchild. Clicking that tab exposes ALL the stuff you are most likely going to want to share: tables, pictures, links, video, audio, etc. And smartly, inserting an image kicks you next to the Picture Tools that let you compress, recolor etc. Big lessons here? First, you see commands where and where you need them. Second, they rethought what people actually use the application for and came to grips with it. Remember the old version? Insert was just another hidden menu item.

10) Previous and Next buttons are persistant and easy to find. You can fly through each message easily with back and next clicks. One button action for reading everything.

11) Your needs for some functions (like received mail) are different than your needs for sending mail. So, different needs have different buttons. Thus, the ribbon is different between each function and different tasks are hidden or exposed based on what you are logically going to want to do.

This release is very much about user-centered design. And, I think Microsoft’s efforts here are right on the money. This is a growing trend in web design too. Make things make more sense for real people and the way they are most likely going to interact with your product. In a VERY LARGE respect, this is how Flickr got big when there were other ways to share photos before. It was easy on the eyes, logically laid out and fast to learn.

So is Office 2007.