DISQUS

bought it from itunes about 2 weeks ago...one of my favorite records of all time. musicians tend not to think of Townshend as a lead guitarist, but this record puts that myth to rest.

Oh, and nice post.

I think you're an honest blogger, and I think I've been reading you since you started, and from all accounts you're an honest VC. Good VCs can only be honest. Now, some might use their leverage for the best possible deal for their LPs and themselves, but that's not about honesty, it's about restraint.

Microsoft didn't kill off Lotus, Jason. Lotus killed Lotus and then sold out to IBM, which successfully smothered it.

Next, Netscape started in 1994 and sold to AOL for $10 billion by the time the deal closed in 1998. That doesn't sound like death to me. It does sound like Jason saying something literally untrue (perhaps unintentionally) and then you repeating it without challenging it or correcting it. I think the world has come to accept this view of the history of the software world, and it just isn't accurate.

People need to come to grips with the fact that you can beat Microsoft if you serve your customers better and market better.

Apple is the most interesting public company today. If Jobs is the primary driver behind everything--design, platform, marketing, etc, then they absolutely need to find a way to instituionalize his contribution and start developing other potential leaders--if they care about the long term future of the company. And who's to say they aren't already doing this?

Steve Jurvetson once told me that while he was at NeXT, Jobs would come through and point to one guy and call him a hero and point to another and call him an asshole "You're a hero, you're an asshole". To him the world was black and white. Arrogant.

And so what? Is it arrogance if it's true? So what! Great products, great hype, cool platform, hugely profitable, and positioned to significantly shit on Microsoft in a beautiful way by releasing the crown jewel as open source OR at least as a generic PC version. (What and lose the design of the $2799 MacBook Pro?--yeah.).

Jobs' health really isn't any of our business unless it gets in the way of Apple's goals. But a long-term succession plan is incredibly important. Do they have one? Do they have "Mack truck" contingencies? Does Apple know its asshole from a hole in the gorund without Jobs? I think it's very shortsighted for investors to think that the rest of the company doesn't know what it's all about.

BTW--on my way to the Knopfler show I stopped at the Apple store in King of Prussia last night to pick up a cable. It was packed, yet I got personal attention and was able to purchase and check out without standing in a line because of the handheld/mobile POS thing. I'm not a Mac guy, so that was new to me--perfect customer experience. Paying $20 for a bullshit $.30 monster cable wasn't, but the experience itself was terrific. Now, Jobs leaves Apple and does that go away? People need to give the Apple board, management, and employees much more credit.

Jobs rocks. I hope he's well or able to get well, but so what. He's great, and part of that is he's created an amazing legacy in Apple.

Well, the blog isn't all about honesty, but as a longtime reader I can say you seem very honest and open. Max, it's easy to spit on someone but it takes truly paying attention to understand. I don't think you're paying attention enough to suggest Fred is dishonest. Biased for his companies, naturally, sure, and he's open and honest about that too.

Time to celebrate the good. But we need to get beyond the militarism that informs our holidays. While the liberation of Europe was a just cause and something to be proud of, the legacy of our military-based economic expansionism is not.

Dismantle KBR. Halliburton. Reduce Pentagon; over 50% of our discretrionary budget goes to the war machine.

Time for a Department of Peace.

They need to just get the purchase over with, and worry about the details after. Break it up, ALONG with parts of Microsoft. Microsoft stunts its own growth. They have a ton of smart people, innovation, and powerful channels, but can't get the innovation to the channels. It's time to split that sucker up and make the individual parts successful through autonomy.

getting people out of poverty--now that would be novel. for the US.

My limited experience (two funded companies) has been that venture capitalists want to invest in the risk that created a successful product or model, but once the money is in they want to reduce risk, and it stifles innovation. That's too broad a statement, but it feels that way.

The thing is, Fred, is there are laws for businesses that prevent them from bashing each other like Hillary did to Obama in PA and elsewhere. What these polls indicate is that if you smear your opponent, some people will believe it. It also shows that before Hillary smears Obama effectively, people liked him better and didn't like her much at all. Because he has chosen not to smear back (imagine all the things he's left off the table), the gap closes.

Clinton can't win. She can't close the deal. So she's trying to bash her way to something, but it certainly can not--mathematically--be the nomination.

The thing is, Fred, is there are laws for businesses that prevent them from bashing each other like Hillary did to Obama in PA and elsewhere. What these polls indicate is that if you smear your opponent, some people will believe it. It also shows that before Hillary smears Obama effectively, people liked him better and didn't like her much at all. Because he has chosen not to smear back (imagine all the things he's left off the table), the gap closes.

Clinton can't win. She can't close the deal. So she's trying to bash her way to something, but it certainly can not--mathematically--be the nomination.

It was cool to see the kid who was arrested in Egypt use Twitter to alert his friends--and his subsequent release. http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/webscout/2008/0...

Maybe you can suck up to the Chinese government like Yahoo and Microsoft do.

"The blogging revolution is the adult social network whereas Facebook style social networking is for teens and college kids. This gap will narrow."

I've blogged since 1999 (built my own before it was a blog). But most of my friends do not blog. The percentage of adults on Facebook is, I'm guessing, much greater than the percentage of adults actively blogging. The number of reported blogs is much greater than the number of active blogs.

Facebook is shallow when it comes to expression; blogging can be as deep as possible. But Facebook, as someone notes above, gives deep profiles to marketers, whereas blogs just give content that has to be read to be understood in the context of a profile.

I'd like to see search added to intelligence

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sc9PepjyDow&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/Sc9PepjyDow&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

the bush government.

Adopt a "patient capital" approach and stop selling off your companies.

I think companies with real markets can grow into a contracting economy. Not all spending stops in a recession. It might be a bad time to invest in a new SUV company, but even something in the housing market could do ok. If your revenues are $5 million this year, it will take quite a while before you feel the effects, unless it's a sector that 1)stops spending altogether 2) slows for startups or 3) is dependent on ads from a slumping category.

indeed

The difference between SMS and Twitter is maybe like this: say you have a teen who goes out for the day. 5 minutes into the day he calls "dad, I'm heading into the subway" then calls again, "dad, I'm out of the subway, and heading to Virgin" and then calls again "Dad, I'm in Virgin and looking for a new record by a band I can't remember the name of" and then decides to head to the park and calls and says "dad I'm heading to the park."

First, it's a one-to-one relationship. So the only input back from that information is from Dad. Never a complete picture. Next, Dad's getting a bit bored by the thrid call, and by the fourth a bit annoyed, because he's busy rearranging his stock certificates. Finally, Dad only cares about when he leaves and when he gets back. Something like that.

All along the way, Dad didn't have a choice. Twitter gives Junior the ability to be less intrusive, expands his audience and feedback loop beyond dad, and gives Dad the ability to check up on junior at his leisure instead of at Junior's whim. SMS gives Junior the ability to poke someone, while Twitter makes it someone's choice to be informed by Junior or not. Twitter is more civil, less urgent, and more open to a variety of feedback.

That said, Twitter isn't for loners. If you have no audience, it's like sending your diary to info@something.com (www.something.com is a zen moment)

I don't see how you can be a fan of billy bragg and his music but not his poltiics, which is all over his music.

Yes, they have no obligation to provide a business model, but they do have an obligation to pay for material they use that has not been explicitly been made free. If I sell nothing because people either expect it free or don't like it, that's my problem.

That said, why not create a pre-roll ad system for all mp3s?

Artists need to get paid for their creative works, period. There's an existing system that works--ASCAP should force collections from the sites just like they do bars, restaurants. Stealing music through crappy mp3s is nevrer justified. Giving it away is justified, but the question is how do you make a living as a songwriter who doesn't tour? It has to be through some sort of royalty. The non-touring musician's music is just as valid as the touring musician's. I scraped by as a musician, playing bar and club circuits, cutting records, etc. The best monetization came from royalties, hands down. I understand the value of free as a marketing tool, but it should be my choice, not the fans'.

Family is a relationship-intensive business, too.

I have ruined enough vacations that at this point my planning for vacation has little to do with where I'm going and much to do with how I hand things off and complete things before I go. There is no such thing as a working vacation. You're either shortchanging the vacation or shortchanging work, and feeling crappy about both. Or at least I do ;)

So what I do now is work on the travel days, plus the first day there, then put everything away. And it works so much better, and my work is better when I return.