Tag | voice
Evernote Launches Trunk, A Showcase Of Evernote-Enabled Products
Today at a special event in San Francisco, Evernote CEO Phil Libin unveiled Trunk, a new showcase of products, services, and hardware devices that have integrated Evernote. The idea is to help users enchance their Evernote experience with features they may want but that Evernote doesn’t offer by default, like Voice Transcription (via services like Dial2Do, pliq.me, and QuickTate), PDF annotation, and business card scanning. Libin says that at launch there are over 100 items available to users; some are brand new, and others have featured Evernote for a while. The Trunk breaks up these integrations by category, including mobile (iPhone, Android, etc), hardware, and web service-based apps. One focus for the Trunk is to help your memories “bridge to the social web”. Libin says that historically, Evernote has been inherently anti-social, but that in some cases you may want to remember elements from social applications. To address that, Seesmic took the stage to detail a feature that allows users to send items from their streams to their Evernote accounts, creating so-called “social memories”. In the future Libin says there will be “a lot more functionality” to the Trunk (it’s clear that Evernote is looking to become a platform for memory services and programs). One area Evernote is excited is games — memory and braintraining games are in the works. And he says there are plenty of new upcoming hardware and software implementations as well. In terms of monetization, Libin says many of the apps and services in the Trunk are free. In the future there will be “in-trunk commerce” where you can click a button to add certain functionality for Evernote (and pay the third party developer). There will be an affiliate program and an integrated rev-share program as well. Monetization features will be coming this winter. CrunchBase Information Evernote Information provided by CrunchBase
See the article here:
Evernote Launches Trunk, A Showcase Of Evernote-Enabled Products
A Million Users Strong, Google Voice Opens To All
When Google launches new services, they often gets a lot of hype (see: Wave, Buzz). Unfortunately, they don’t always live up to that hype (see: Wave, Buzz). But one service that Google launched last year definitely has: Google Voice . Sadly, it has only been open to those with invites. But starting today, it is open to all. Google Voice started as GrandCentral, a startup launched in 2006 to revolutionize phone management on the web. Google quickly snapped it up in 2007 for over $50 million. For the next two years, it went through a metamorphosis. During that time, some wondered if it was yet another service that Google bought and let die. But in 2009, it emerged as the Google Voice butterfly. The “early preview” of Google Voice that Google unveiled last year has since undergone a number of changes . Notably, SMS now works better, a Chrome extension makes it simple to keep on top of everything, and there’s a great mobile web app. Most importantly though, Google Voice now works seamlessly with all Android-based mobile phones. The solution is brilliant — and was the central figure in Google’s falling out with Apple (after they rejected the native Google Voice app). There are also some features we’re still waiting for — such as full number portability and a desktop app (which may be scrapped now). Google says that there are now over one million people actively using the service. You can expect that number to balloon now that anyone can go to the site and sign up. In fact, why are you still reading this? Go sign up (well, if you’re in the U.S. – yes, it’s still U.S.-only). After all, according to the chart below, Google Voice is the pinnacle of human communication. CrunchBase Information Google Voice Information provided by CrunchBase
Originally posted here:
A Million Users Strong, Google Voice Opens To All
Google Voice Desktop App Launch Delayed, May Be Scrapped
When Google acquired Gizmo5 , a Skype competitor, in November Google Voice users rejoiced – presumably they’d be getting a much needed soft phone on the desktop for users to make and receive calls through Google Voice. We confirmed that the application had been rewritten and was being tested internally at Google in April. Some Google employees continue to use the app, we’ve confirmed. But don’t expect it to launch publicly any time soon, we’ve heard from multiple sources. Why? an internal religious debate about desktop software. Google founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin don’t want Google to be in the business of creating software outside of the browser, say our sources. And that’s consistent with Google’s product launches over the last several years. Of course it ignores the efforts that Google is putting into developing their own Chrome browser, Chrome operating system and Android operating system, as well as a variety of mobile apps – all are software that installs on computers or mobile devices. But there may be a hard line when it comes to pure desktop apps like Google Voice. So the team has been sent back to the drawing board to try to make a workable soft phone that will work entirely within the browser using HTML 5. Possible? Nope, not today, and not at scale, say our sources. Skype tried for years to create a browser based version of the service and never launched. The biggest problem is around proper integration with the microphone, it’s just really hard to get good sound quality with HTML 5 today. In a year or two that may change. But users don’t want to wait a year. For now they can get a Skype phone number for €50/year and forward Google Voice to that. But you can’t call out of Skype using your Google Voice phone number ( Update: strike that, see comments below – you can set Skype called ID to your Google Voice number), and that cost is fairly expensive for a soft phone. I say rules are made to be broken, and this is one of them. Release the client, Google. We want it. CrunchBase Information Google Voice Information provided by CrunchBase
Originally posted here:
Google Voice Desktop App Launch Delayed, May Be Scrapped
Rdio Silence: Apple Delays iPhone App Update For Reasons Unknown
Last week at the D8 conference , and again at Apple’s WWDC event , chief exec Steve Jobs said there was nothing inherently wrong with Apple’s review procedures for new and updated iPhone applications. Specifically, Jobs stated several times on both occasions that 95% of all incoming apps get approved for the App Store in seven days. Those that don’t, he added, tend to violate some ground rules: crashing often, using unpublished APIs, defaming real people, or by advertising an app differently than what it actually does. That may well be, but it makes the isolated cases where all those exceptions don’t apply stick out like a sore thumb. We hear Apple’s review process is actually getting slower again for some developers. Cases in point: Appsfire , which we wrote about yesterday, Reeder (which has a great iPad version of its iPhone app waiting to get approved) and now, freshly launched music subscription service Rdio . Rdio, with backing from well known European entrepreneurs Janus Friis and Niklas Zennstrom of Skype, Kazaa and Joost fame, was soft-launched in the United States last week to much fanfare. But as we noted in December 2009, their iPhone app has been in the App Store for much longer than that (though unusable for most anyone). I’ve been trying out the service and the iPhone app since last week’s launch, and expect to do a full review real soon. In short, I think it’s phenomenal. It stacks up against Spotify any day, and I think we’ll be hearing a lot about this startup in the coming years. Only problem so far is, their iPhone app doesn’t really function all that well, and the company has acknowledged this on their Twitter feed in the past. I’ve spoken to a number of people close to the company about this, and from what I can gather they submitted an updated app with a couple of bug fixes weeks ago, but Apple is making the review process a long-winded road for them with little or no communication. No one from Rdio will officially confirm this to me (yet), but from what I understand there’s a sneaking suspicion that what is holding Apple back isn’t actually the app, but the music service that it channels. Of course, we haven’t yet seen what Apple is going to do with its iTunes-in-the-cloud service (rest assured that it’s coming, though) so this is all speculation. But what if they don’t really like what Rdio is doing because they see it as direct competition? Does that mean Rdio for iPhone, and by extension other jukebox-in-the-cloud services like Spotify and Rhapsody stand a chance of being “Google Voice’d” out of the App Store because the functionality is similar to a service Apple will provide in-house? That would certainly explain the delay. CrunchBase Information Rdio Apple Steve Jobs Information provided by CrunchBase
More here:
Rdio Silence: Apple Delays iPhone App Update For Reasons Unknown
What’s Missing From iPhone 4 Is Part Of What Makes It Great
On Monday, Apple officially unveiled the iPhone 4 . After playing around with it for 20 minutes or so after the keynote, I can safely say that it’s the most impressive mobile device I’ve ever seen . But plenty of people (many of which have never used the phone) disagree. Their arguments are mainly predicated on what Apple didn’t include rather than what it did. But what those people fail to understand is that this is exactly what makes the new iPhone (as well as the previous iterations) so solid. During his keynote address on Monday, Apple CEO Steve Jobs noted that while Apple may not be the first to release features, they do so in a way that’s the best implementation. Many people view this as absolute bullshit. But what that implies is that they think Apple simply cannot get features done in time — or that they will not do them for some reason. I have a hard time believing either of those is the case. Jobs cited the iPhone’s cut, copy, & paste functionality as one example of Apple getting a feature right. I have to agree. For two years, everyone complained (myself included) that Apple didn’t have this functionality. Could Apple have done it sooner? Of course. But would it have been half-baked? Probably. Just look at how it works on other devices — or maybe I should say: look at how poorly it works on other devices compared to the iPhone. Most Android phones want you to use that damn ball to select text. Or worse, those arrow buttons at the bottom of the EVO’s horrid keyboard. It’s a nightmare. Another popular example is background tasks (or multitasking). This feature is finally coming to the new iOS 4 after being on other devices for a few years. So was Apple dragging its feet out of incompetence? Or were they being stubborn? In their view, they were waiting to perfect the system that would not destroy battery life. Android’s background method is supposedly similar to what Apple will use, but it has issues (see: the EVO ). Most people haven’t yet seen third-party apps running in the background with iOS, so it’s hard to know exactly how well Apple has done here. (And I only got to play around with one app, Pandora, running in the background for a few minutes.) But a few developers I’ve talked to who have used the system say it’s by far the best combination of functionality and battery-saving techniques that they’ve seen. One told me that it basically doesn’t ding battery life at all. In March of last year, I reported that I had heard from sources that Apple was talking about ways to bring background tasks to the iPhone. Even though it didn’t happen until now, by multiple accounts, Apple was working on it at the time. It’s just that it took Apple this long to perfect the system. Most companies, seeing their competitors already doing something, would feel forced into releasing their own solution as quickly as possible. Not Apple. And I suspect this ends up being a big benefit for the users. But those are things that currently now work on the iPhone or will soon be working. What about newer features that Apple left out of iPhone 4 (and iOS 4)? Here’s a list of 10 things from eWeek . Some are ridiculous (for the millionth time: Apple is not going to do a physical keyboard — nor should they), and some are just clearly (and sadly) not going to happen (Google Voice). But a few are things that come up somewhat regularly. One is 4G support. The main problem here is that the iPhone is still exclusively tied to AT&T in the U.S., and AT&T has basically no 4G support yet (they have enough problems with their 3G support). If Apple made a version of the iPhone that worked on Sprint’s network (which recently rolled out the EVO 4G), then maybe we could talk — but they don’t. More importantly, I’m not even sure we’ll see a 4G-capable iPhone next year . As Apple proved with the first iPhone (which wasn’t 3G despite 3G being fairly ubiquitous at the time), they care more about the overall experience than about being the first to have a nice-sounding feature. Users laughed at the notion that 3G capabilities severely dinged battery life — until the iPhone 3G came out and that’s exactly what happened. With 4G, by all accounts, the battery ding is even worse. Also, 4G is still slowly deploying around the country, and some carriers (read: AT&T) won’t have it really deployed for a long, long time. In other words, don’t be surprised if next year Apple still doesn’t have a 4G version of the device. Everyone will bitch about it, but in Apple’s view, it likely just won’t be worth it yet. Another feature brought up is over-the-air (OTA) updates. While eWeek seems to specifically be talking about OTA firmware updates (does anyone really care about that so much?), the more pressing issue is the ability to sync things wirelessly on your iPhone. Currently, you can only truly do that with certain MobileMe elements (like Calendar, Contacts, etc). But in his post a couple days ago, my colleague Jason Kincaid brought up his disappointment that over-the-air syncing of things like apps and music wasn’t in iOS yet. This is a fair point both because it would be very useful, and because it’s baked into the latest version of Android, 2.2. But we have yet to see exactly how well this system with work with Android 2.2. The on-stage demos at Google I/O were impressive, but it probably wouldn’t have been made into a demo if it weren’t. The proof will be in the real-world usage of this feature. Apple is clearly thinking about how best to do this as well. Jobs said as much during the D Conference a few weeks ago, and Apple has even blocked applications that do something similar (a sign that they’re likely working on it — and that they don’t want third parties touching the iTunes/iPhone sync interaction). Make no mistake: this feature will be coming to the iPhone. And I would bet it will be here next year. And if Apple is able to get its iTunes-in-the-cloud service off the ground in time, it could be a lot easier than people are thinking right now. The point to all of this is that one of the things that makes the iPhone great is that Apple is so deliberate and meticulous in the features they choose to focus on and implement. Could Apple include more features? Of course. But anytime you try to do more, you take focus away from the key things you want to get done. It’s something that’s so obvious it almost needs to be restated. It’s the same reason why startups that focus on creating as many features as possible often fare worse than those that focus on a few key ideas. The ones that keep it simple are able to execute much better. Apple (which likes to think of itself as the “world’s biggest startup”) is no different, and the iPhone is a testament to that. The conspiracy theorists will say that Apple holds back features to be able to sell more devices the next time around. I believe it’s much less about that, and more about focusing on a core group of features that matter the most — and nailing them. Judging by both sales figures and customer satisfaction reports , the strategy is working. And the iPhone 4 — even without 4G, OTA updates, a physical keyboard, etc, etc, etc — will prove that once again. CrunchBase Information iPhone 4 Apple Android Information provided by CrunchBase
Original post:
What’s Missing From iPhone 4 Is Part Of What Makes It Great
Get the Most From Your VoIP Provider
As small businesses continue to play a significant role in the changing economy, technologies addressing their unique requirements follow suit. One of the most compelling concepts at play in enterprise technology with profound implications for small businesses is hosted Voice over Internet Protocol, which enables smaller businesses to conduct national and even global communications with increased functionality and reduced cost. With the promise of minimum hardware investment, lower phone bills and converged voice and data services, hosted VoIP holds the potential to set an efficiency standard for a powerful segment of the global economy. This is probably why analysts have pegged the VoIP industry to reach 79 percent of all U.S. businesses within the next three years. But the promise of hosted VoIP–as with any promise–is only as good as its fulfillment. And some businesses have been turned off by what they’ve experienced as the true costs of VoIP. The hard costs of purchasing new, VoIP-enabled phones are the most obvious financial hurdles, but the oft-overlooked soft costs can be even more expensive to a company’s reputation, growth and survival. Ironically, most of these are related to VoIP’s very backbone–the internet. Poor quality voice systems and dropped calls due to limited bandwidth or power–all of which can cause immediate damage to business relationships–are among potential soft costs companies must be aware of and protect against. The good news? Companies have the power to sidestep each and every one of these VoIP drawbacks. A strong broadband connection, high-quality hardware and a reputable service provider are essential assets that empower small businesses to reap the many advantages of a VoIP system. On the provider side, I’ve taken a look at
Google Testing Google Voice Desktop App Internally
Last November Google acquired Gizmo5 , a VoIP service that competed with Skype by making P2P VoIP calls as well as making and receiving calls with POTS (normal landlines) and mobile phones. Gizmo5 fills some of the holes in the Google Voice product, particularly providing an endpoint for calls. Currently Google Voice users must assign their Google Voice phone number to an actual phone to make and receive calls. Google never commented on how they might use Gizmo5’s technology. But we’ve confirmed that they have now built a Google Voice desktop application to make and receive calls. From a user perspective, this will let Google Voice users take calls right from their desktop. When will the new application launch? Possibly soon. Earlier this week Google started testing the application internally. This “dogfooding” of products (as in “eating your own dog food”) is a step that Google and many other companies take before launching something publicly, to iron out any problems that pop up. CrunchBase Information Google Voice Information provided by CrunchBase
View original post here:
Google Testing Google Voice Desktop App Internally
VC Rightsizing
The news came out yesterday that VC funding in the US was down in Q1. Really down. VC funding into start-ups averaged roughly $20 billion a year for many years since the bubble crashed and recently (2007 and 2008) had creeped up to $30 billion a year. The Q1'09 figure was $3.0 billion, suggesting we are on a $12 billion runrate. Although new financings may pick up a bit in the second half of 209, I would predict that VC funding for 2009-2011 doesn't exceed $20 billion per year and probably stays closer to $15 billion per year. And guess what? VC downsizing is ok. In fact, it's a good thing. Frankly, I'm not sure the VC industry should be much above this range. It's not that there are a lack of great entrepreneurs chasing great ideas. It's simply the lack of good exit prospects. We don't have input constraints. Instead, we have output or exit constraints. Clearly, the lack of attractive exit prospects is choking the industry right now. VC fund after VC fund can point to portfolio companies that are growing rapidly, taking market share, even achieving profitability in many cases, but have no place to go. The IPO market remains completely irrelevant to VCs. Yes, Rosetta Stone had a successful IPO – the first one since March 2008 to be priced above the range. And there are a few other interesting filings in the pipeline. But don't be fooled by bankers bearing gifts and snake oil. The IPO market may return modestly for some large, profitable companies will not return anytime soon for VC-backed companies. You know it's a bad young company IPO market when the case studies the bankers cite are Visa and Mead Johnson I attended a breakfast last week where JP Morgan's vice chairman, David Topper, gave his review of the macroeconomic picture, including the IPO market. Although he was too polite to say it outright, his data clearly showed will be irrelevant to VCs for the foreseeable future. He laid out the three criteria that are required for an IPO candidate: 1) IPO size of $200 million (implying a market capitalization north of $700 million). Without this level of float, there isn't enough liquidity in the stock to attrack investors. 2) Profitable, established business (i.e., not “approaching profitable” but proven profitable over many quarters if not years). 3) Minimal leverage. Of these three, #1 is the real killer for venture-backed start-ups. When I was an executive at Open Market and did our IPO in 1996, we executed an $80 million IPO – at the time, that was considered mid-sized. In today's environment, where Google is trading at a 6-8x EBITDA multiple and typical revenue multiples are 2-3x, an IPO candidate would need to be throwing off $100 million in cash flow and/or generating north of $200-300 million in revenue while still growing fast. These are incredible numbers for venture-backed start-ups less than 10 years old. There are complaints about reforming Sarbanes Oxley – and I have added my voice to those complaints in the past – but I walked away from this breakfast with a greater appreciation for why one of the NVCA policy leaders recently said to me, “SOX reform is important, but no one is going to focus on that until restructuring the financial system as a whole is done.” I also appreciated why my friend and mentor, HBS Professor of entrepreneurship Bill Sahlman, told me last week that he thought the VC industry needed to shrink in half. Going from $30 billion per year in outflow to $15 billion per year would mean just that – and it will mean more VC personnel departure and fund shut downs. And, again, that's ok. It's worth noting that the last time annual VC funding dipped below $20 billion was in 2003, which saw $19 billion in VC investment. 2003 was one of the best vintage years in the last decade, as many are arguing 2009-2010 will be. Maybe I'm simply a rose-colored glasses optimist, but at the end of the day, an industry that quickly adjusts to new realities is a healthy sign. Until we figure out an alternative exit vehicle (and maybe someday the overall public market health will allow some liquidity to filter down to the VC-backed world, but don't hold your breath), we can't absorb more than $15-20 billion in annual VC investments anyway. So let's get the industry back to that level and vigorously deploy those dollars in as productive and rewarding a fashion as possible.
Read more from the original source:
VC Rightsizing
