DISQUS

That's what I get for commenting while chowing down on a burger, the sentence should have been I know that I won't get to everY tweet . . . Not sure about the capabilities of Tweetdeck since I haven't tried it out, but even if you can filter Twitter in this way, it still wouldn't be a competition in my book.

FF's killer app is the ability to comment on other's posts and have that conversation aggregated into one place. With Twitter, it's hard to just insert yourself randomly into a conversation with someone you don't know. On FF it's one of the best parts of the community. It allows everyone to benefit from the conversation instead of just the person it was directed @

The relaxed character limits are nice too especially because I tend to struggle keeping things brief. Being able to add a photo, embed a video or include an .mp3 of a podcast w/ a post is also pretty cool and allows for a richer media experience.

I think that influence on FF works differently then Twitter. With Twitter people need to know you outside the service for your Tweets to have any kind of reach. If you're the CEO of a startup or some exec or celeb enough people want to communicate with you that a single tweet can create a huge wave. With FF it's different. The conversations bump back up to the top everytime you like or comment something, so social interaction is rewarded even more than fame.

As FF grows up, what I see happening is that these super popular people are going to serve as hubs where new users will congregate and get to know each other around their posts. The larger your network, the better you can bring people into a conversation around the topics you care about most. With FF being as young as it is, 100 followers today will be worth 2,000 in the future. For those who missed cementing their influence on Twitter early on, I see FF as a mulligan.

Great observations Dale, as you mentioned I left Twitter for FriendFeed so my perspective is a little bit different, but in defense of following a ton of people let me point out how I use Friendfeed. First, I know that I won't get to ever Tweet or FF post, so I don't try and use it that way. This is what my RSS reader is for. When it comes to FF or Tweets, I see it as a live snapshot on things that are happening within my social circle. This means that I don't see everything, but I do tend to see the breaking news. I've even noticed that FF has been breaking news faster than Bloomberg feeds, which is saying a lot considering that people pay Bloomberg $1,500 a month for the quick access to news.

Beyond what's just happening now, I also like the search only your friends feature on FF. This allows me to follow 1,000 people whose opinion that I care about, but then restrict it to topics that I'm only interested in. If someone in my lifestream has something to say about Apple, it will probably put me to sleep, but if someone is talking about TiVo or DivX, you can bet that I care very much about the opinion they are expressing. By only following 50 - 100 people you don't get enough content to make these filters very useful. While you raise good points and I do think it would be better if we could distinguish between following someone and being their friend better, but at the same time, the firehose of content has advantages too.

I'm sorry, but I don't want my cell phone company anywhere near my content. Too many opportunities for them to put their sticky fingers into my wallet. Instead of forcing people to "subscribe" to content they pre-approve why not support digital video standards like DivX instead? It may not earn them much in incremental revenue, but it will allow them to serve customers like myself who value openness over proprietary closed systems.

I want to buy an Android but keep putting it off. I wish that the platform was a little bit more developed. I also wish that there was a way to get data services without having to give up my prepaid plan or enter into some length contract. Nonetheless, tools like this make me want to forget about my fear of commitment.

I think the points thing is kind of annoying too. I've never actually bought anything because I don't want to have to deal with the hassle.

I use to have a live account, but canceled it because I tended to get slaughtered. Even on the games I was good at, I was lucky to win 10% of my games. It's more fun to play the computer. I'm not really a shooter fan as much as a strategy guy. My favorite game is Civilization, but that is for the PC.

I tend to prefer easy games over the hard ones. It's nice to have a challenge, but sometimes it's fun to experience the whole game without having to spend 3 months playing it.

It sounds like Zattoo has a pretty good defense, but I can't say that I'd be enthusiastic about seeing this trend go any further. It's one thing to only see commercials while channel surfing because of bad timing, but another when it's your TV provider. Given all of the problems Universal and Warner Brothers have had, one would think that they'd be embracing new ad business models.

Absolutely diabolic, I think that it's a great idea. Now you just have to come up with a catch phrase and some kind of zany outfit and you've got Batman's next super villain.

My DVR is going to get hit pretty hard. These are the favorites that I'll miss.

Dirty Sexy Money
Eli Stone
Harper's Island
My Own Worst Enemy
Prison Break
Reaper
Terminator, Sarah Conner Chronicles
Worst Week

1.) I think that the content is great. Write about what you care about, those are the best articles because they have passion in them.
2.) I've always had the philosophy that less is more. I'd rather see high quality articles then a lot of them. 2 times a day may be the right frequency as long as you don't feel compelled to include padding to meet your goals.
3.) Can't say that I'm a huge fan of podcasts. They take up too much time to listen to, are hard to search for relevant info and often remind me too much of talk radio. Having said that, I'd love to see an occasional audio interview to go along with your blog posts or even video if you ever go visit some of the companies you write about. Some people may be into a more regular podcast schedule, but I know it's hard for me to stay tuned into them.
4.) A most awesome logo. Definitely hope that you include it in the future.
5.) I think I found your site when you commented on one of my posts, but it could also have been something your wrote about Netflix or TiVo. Either way, I'm glad that I discovered Geek Tonic.
6.) My only suggestion would be to consider a site redesign. Not for any good reason, just because I like change. I'm thinking something a litle bit more web 2.0ish with a little geektonic zest.

While I don't disagree with you, let me play devils advocate. Suppose that instead of thinking about the music as being the product, we use attention instead. Consumers only have a limited amount of it, businesses have figured out a way and want to profit as much as they can from it. If someone's attention drives them to a point where they'll be willing to pay more, manufacturers will meet that demand by creating product. This is usually done through big marketing campaigns, TV show and movie tie ins, and radio air play. By stimulating consumers interest, the business' product becomes more profitable and they can charge more. If someone values their time differently or cares more about the less popular bands, then the labels are still able to capture that sale by discounting to provide the value instead. Businesses use price discrimination to squeeze consumers all the time. It's the reason why matinees and twilight films are cheaper then the 7pm showing. The theaters know that seniors hang out in the mornings why working people come out at night. I'm not sure that their argument violates any economic theory, but I do agree that they're trying to be greedy.

Wow, I'm impressed. Seems like a pretty cool idea, although if it's dependent on your wifi connection it might get annoying everytime your router drops the signal or the power goes out. I'd also be a bit worried that others could clone your signal so that they could break in while you''re gone, but I suppose that this would be an issue whether he was using an iPhone or not.

Sounds like a plan. I'm not sure what the reimagined season is yet, but once I get far enough to figure it out, I'm sure I'll be blabbing about it. A few years ago, Horror movies were my favorite genre but over the last few years Sci-Fi has grown to be my #1.

So many Starbucks make my head spin. I haven't seen BSG yet, but it's pretty high up on my list. As soon as I finish up with Farscape and Stargate Atlantis, I plan on watching it from start to finish (include original episodes.)

Cool idea, although I think there are some flaws in their plan. First off, unless they can get critical mass, it's hard for me to see this taking off with consumers. Secondly, I'm not sure that I fully understand how this is all that better then a .com domain. Finally, I know that we're running out of telephone numbers, but doesn't that make more sense to use as an identifying number? If this takes off, I'll consider it more closely, but I think I need to see it gain traction before it's worth paying for something like this.

Pretty cool trick, the cost of the domain name is next to nothing compared to the hosting plan. Now if you can only figure out a way to stop people from spoofing email addresses, I'd be all set.

For as much as the studios like to complain about piracy, it's hard to be very sympathetic when they put those ridiculous geographic restrictions on the content. I don't know the details behind the policy, but I'm sure that it has to do with trying to charge more for the content. If you're going to tease a consumer with major marketing campaigns and then tell them sorry Jack, you've got to wait an extra year to get the film or TV show, it shouldn't be surprising that people will rebel and undercut their efforts. When you consider how far online video has come over the last decade, it's really depressing to see how little the content owners have budged. Hopefully, at some point they'll quit trying to fight the pirates and embrace business models for monetizing them instead.

Even if it's a download service, that doesn't necessarily mean that VUDU needs a lot of storage. By networking to your home computer, they could use the storage and the horsepower there to power a stripped down version.

I think that Netflix is seeing early adopters buy devices like Roku and Blu-Ray Netflix players, but that they'll be another layer of customers who start signing up once Netflix CE devices become more common. People who would have normally just bought a TV will all of a sudden have this new capability and inevitably some of them will want to check out. In effect each CE device will become a marketing vehicle for Netflix's subscription solution. It should help them greatly expand their membership. The monthly subscriptions really are genius. Cable could potentially be a monthly subscription competitor, but they're limited by a geographic footprint and have notoriously closed systems. We could also see Blockbuster try to mirror Netflix's approach, but they seem to be three steps behind in their efforts. It will be hard for an Amazon or Apple to take a monthly approach because they don't have the DVD base to subsidize the digital offerings.

I think that this is a great idea to make a feature. Netflix says that people like me rated Out of Africa 1.9, so I'll be taking a pass on that one, but I'm intrigued by The Shadow Riders which has a strong 4.0 recommendation for me. I saw Full Metal Jacket and enjoyed that, but am more excited about The Matrix. I only wish that they would have included all three. When I watch sequels and trilogies, I want to see them in order.

Thanks for the feedback Mark, you raise some very interesting observations. The Bay Area may have been first, but I really doubt that we have anywhere close to a 30% penetration rate here. Once you finish collecting your data, I'd love it if you'd be willing to share it with me. Tracking AT&T;'s entire US rollout is too daunting of a challenge alone, but with help, I'm hoping to prove that this pattern extends beyond the bay area.

They've got some hungry women there and they'll really make a mess out of you.

2001 Space Odyssey has it's place in the sci-fi canon, but I found the movie to be too slow for my tastes. As far as Clockwork Oranges goes, it was a little bit too abstract for me to fully appreciate. I didn't mind the violence in it, but just couldn't understand the rationalization for it, so it made it hard for me to appreciate. The good the bad and the ugly is a really good film, but Glengarry Glen Ross was too legendary of a film to pass it up. The writing, acting, and directing were all amazing. There are no fancy special effects, but the character development was superb.

My understanding is that Netflix has a fail rate of approximately 5%. Some of the more popular series like the Soprano's tend to fail at a higher rate because of higher usage, but considering how fragile DVDs actually are, 5% isn't all that bad. In the past Netflix has said that they get about 20 - 25 turns out of a DVD before it goes bust which would also support this 5% number.

I think the point to take away from my post is that at Movie Gallery, they would have charged you the full price for the defective DVD while at Netflix, they replace it for free. Imagine how upset you'd be if it cost you $19.99 everytime your Married w/ Children's disc failed to play. It's a bit of a hassle to have to wait for the replacement disc in the mail, but if you're renting 6.5 movies per month (approx average rate for Netflix customers), then it's something that should affect you less then once per quarter. While it's no doubt frustrating to have to wait for the replacement disc, if the issue really matters to you, I'm sure that you could call Netflix support and they'd send out the next disc in your queue.

Ultimately, Netflix doesn't make money off of the failed discs because it causes higher churn, it means they have to buy another DVD and they pay for postage again. I feel pretty confident that this is a problem that they put a lot of resources towards minimizing.