Comments by www.loupaglia.com/correlate
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetRon: That is the one area where I agree. The competitive rejections are ones I question. I can see why they do it but I don't like it, it spurns the spirit of innovation.
Chris: Overall, I agree with you. What core apps (when you set aside open principles) are we missing? It is a good question. The one thing I would say is that there is an element of "you'll never know" what innovation could get blocked by it being closed. That is the danger of a closed system.
But from a business perspective. This strategy has worked for Apple, created a unique marketplace and works for them. Why should they change it?
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetIt would seem this really works in two scenarios. First, where you have a good team but the business is not going to go. Second, and related, when 3.5% of the other company is going to be bigger than the total of your own.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetHow does the assets and the revenues of the company you are acquiring factor in? I would suspect the normal way but how to deal with multiples on revenues and the like become interesting particularly if you don't plan on continuing to leverage their existing line of business?
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetDoesn't make a lot of sense to me. Would be interested in hearing LinkedIn's rationale for this decision. Also surprised that this is the type of thing they are spending time (unless of course it has become an acknowledged pervasive problem for abuse).
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetI do not disagree from a logistics perspective. But Apple succeeds as an experience company and let's face it, they succeeded quite well by not always listening to users. While often not the right approach, it works for them. I can't deny that being more open is quite a change from their proven methods and DNA.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetDoes Amazon have "instant on" for all book submissions or only from reputable suppliers? This is the equivalent of letting anyone submit their own book to a Kindle ecosystem but in this case it is trickier because it is an app and actual code is runiing that could hose the device and device experience.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetBut code reliability and standards adherance is only half the equation. What about the qualitative half which involves a human evaluation on the actual content of the app. Letting everything through may work in an open source world but it is very much misaligned to the corporate DNA of Apple and what many can attribute to their success.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetI don't disagree with the existence of app store moderation process. It is a risk though for the amount of time it takes. The biggest frustration danger that I see Apple having is lack of transparency in the review and approval process.
If they could add transparency to the process by making it more clear when it was under review and more clear reasoning for rejection (ie not that is competes, I mean, confuses users with existing software). That could go a long way and would reduce the perceived time to market. Involve the community (alpha release) and they will embrace it even further.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetNiyi: you can do that by using the "send message" button. From there you can post to your profile, send directly to a contact or also post to a group which is neat functionality.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetStill wonder whether it is the entrepreneur leaving to go back to their country is the biggest loss for the US or the same thing happening with people in the sciences who get their PhD's in their respective discipline and doing phenomenal research to just have to go back their countries. This happens every year as well and should very much be part of this conversation.
Both are big losses for the US and are potentially very correlated.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetThis has huge potential. Will they go only B2B against the likes of Hoover's, D&B, DJ and other players like Yahoo! Finance and Google Finance. There is a real compelling possibility where they could integrate the likes of Gist capability. I'm still not a believer in "enterprise" tracking and "personal" tracking. I want one universal dashboard that I can segment.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetThis is a nice approach and one of those that seems "obvious" but is not b/c that is not often how companies think. The typical approach is "we built this API, they should thank us" when the real goal is "use" and a lift to overall engagement, whatever that may be. Very smart of have the developer community "participate" in the revenue model, it is a win-win incentive.
As David says below, it is like what Apple and FB does for apps. I'm not sure with the business model of Twitter's API, but as revenue models gear up there, it will be interesting to see if this type of model takes hold and develops diverse set of revenue models on the communication stack.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetMax: Matt and Toni have built a company in Automattic that is pretty remarkable that it builds such great stuff and is basically completely virtual. The have engineers all around the world. They have an office in SF which is normally empty except for socials and I think the last I heard their highest employee count in any one city was four.
Reply | Original | Permalink | Tweetwill it replace BackType. still haven't really figured out how to use that service since it is standalone except for routing all of my comments across the web to a widget on my blog.
Reply | Original | Permalink | TweetThanks! Much appreciated.