Disqus - Latest Comments for vanelsas

Re: OccupyAppStore

vanelsas — Thu, 27 Oct 2011 10:33:48 -0000

This is what Zwapp was build for (shameless self promotion, as I am the founder)

Re: Zwapp - van je iPhone vrienden moet je het hebben

vanelsas — Tue, 24 May 2011 03:57:48 -0000

Dank voor het artikel over Zwapp :-)

Een korte toelichting op een aantal observaties die je maakt:
- iOS en Apple maken het onmogelijk om app detectie 100% goed te krijgen. Maar Zwapp leert wel en zal dus naar mate je de app vaker opent ook meer apps voor je detecteren. Je kunt ze ook handmatig in je profile zetten, maar de detectie zorgt er voor dat je niet leeg begint
- V1.1 van Zwapp wacht nu op review en zal binnen enkele dagen live zijn. Deze nieuwe release bevat volledige privacy controle en een hele simpele UI om apps te verwijderen en verkeerde detecties te herstellen. Maar Zwapp is (net als Twitter) van nature open, en biedt iedereen de mogelijkheid om apps met elkaar te delen.
- Populariteit is echt gerelateerd aan je vrienden. We proberen de app store kleiner te maken door je samen met je vrienden nieuwe apps te laten ontdekken. Je kunt nu bv de apps zien die je vrienden nu/net aan het downloaden zijn, de apps die het meest populair bij hen zijn, maar je kunt ook een overzicht zien van populaire apps die je vrienden nog niet hebben.

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 04:24:20 -0000

well, take a look at the app itself before you start telling everyone that you are cooler than we are :-)

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 04:22:56 -0000

Thanks Noam, we'll keep doing our best!

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Sat, 30 Apr 2011 04:22:29 -0000

Hey Frenzapp, no need for bashing around here.. This has been under development for a while now and while you were releasing we where a long way down our own track already.. The featues that are there are obvious from a social perspective and you can/could expect more to have similar thoughts about it. No copying here, each has its own approach.
There is plenty room for innovation on all fronts. There are clear similarities but also some clear differences. For example, we have placed all user profiles on the web as well so that they can share from the web without the need for the app. I like your app, but I believe the market needs competition to make it better for everyone. So relax, and let the user do its thing.

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 17:22:12 -0000

Hi Nishant,

I have no idea why that happened. It certainly isn't the way it ought to work. We request permission and then only once publish something to your feed. I will have my team take a look at this for you to see if we can figure out what happened there.

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 12:26:00 -0000

I like Apptizer! As for most of the (competing) apps in this arena they seem to start with apps and then add friends later into the equation. We are trying to do the opposite. We don't care for hot app lists, we start with friends. I believe the App stores are fundamentally broken because we simply cannot process hundreds of thousands of apps. Zwapp enables you to create little app stores that are run by your friends :-)

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 12:23:24 -0000

iOS makes it hard to automate app detection. On average I think we get anywhere between 20-70% of your apps detected the first time. But our algorithm will improve every time you start Zwapp and it will detect more apps as you use it.

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 12:21:10 -0000

Haha, cool, and untrue. Run Zwapp and find some friends, you'll be amazed what a diversity of apps people have. In the end it is fine if you have blockbuster apps and its even better if you share those with your friends. But there is more than the top 100 list the App Store provides you. How about a list of popular apps none of your friends have right now :-)

Re: Zwapp’s app makes iPhone app discovery more social

vanelsas — Fri, 29 Apr 2011 12:19:02 -0000

Hi Mia,

excellent suggestion, and we will definitely add extra privacy features in future updates.

Re: Why picking a name for a startup does matter

vanelsas — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 14:15:06 -0000

That is a long stretch. And certainly not what we hope people will remember us by. We are using Zwapp - undefined by that same dictionary below.

I guess no matter how hard we try, someone will always find something we didn't intend ;-)

Re: Why picking a name for a startup does matter

vanelsas — Thu, 31 Mar 2011 14:14:15 -0000

Thanks Bartel :-)

Re: Does Price Matter?

vanelsas — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 15:33:06 -0000

Investing in a company needs a return. That return has to be cash, but it should always be something less tangible too. Belief, trust, and the willingness to make it happen together count a lot too.
I've made mistakes in the past where I would accept an offer without looking at the other parts. It never, ever worked out. When you accept an offer from an investor, remember that the both of you are in for a bumpy and possibly long ride. You need to have trust and be able to count on each other.

Re: Invasion of the Apple Fanboys

vanelsas — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 11:49:54 -0000

Uhm, I didn't say I hate fanboys or wish them dead. And this comment doesn't help either. There are already too many extreme reactions around so lets ease up a bit.

Re: Invasion of the Apple Fanboys

vanelsas — Tue, 19 Oct 2010 08:23:31 -0000

Apple makes beautiful products, but there is more in life. I'll take the less perfect but open platform any time over the perfect closed and tightly controlled platform that Apple provides. I don't like the fanatics on either side of the coin. Neither Google nor Apple needs fanboys that are extreme in their defense.

Re: Unrevoked Roots Many Android Phones - And It's Easy

vanelsas — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 02:03:12 -0000

Aaargggh ;-)

Re: Unrevoked Roots Many Android Phones - And It's Easy

vanelsas — Fri, 24 Sep 2010 01:43:15 -0000

Excellent. Was looking for sonething like this for my Nexus One. Thanks for the tip Louis !

Re: Privacy and the Treacherous Middle Ground

vanelsas — Sun, 16 May 2010 07:22:34 -0000

My post title was 'With privacy there is no middle ground'. I think the biggest problem Facebook now faces is their own strategy. You can't defend your users privacy if there isn't a privacy switch for the user that protects him or her from Facebook itself.
I feel they are facing a strategic dilemma. Either they need to be on the user side and implement privacy in such a way that the user has full control (including a switch to prevent Facebook itself to use their data), or they should be extremely clear to the user what their business model is. I have no issue whatsoever with a social network that helps users connect to advertisers. I do have an issue with the attitude of 'we care about the privacy of our users' while they do not provide full control over your privacy. It is this mismatch between their PR and their action that hurts them now. Its a trap they dug themselves and the only way to get out is to decide which one of the above scenarios they want to be.

Re: “Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You”

vanelsas — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 16:13:07 -0000

You and I will never agree on this Jesse. Its clear that we have a very different view on what privacy is. When you talk about Facebook in the context of privacy, you seem to be talking about the stuff that gets out of Facebook into the open. And yes, they do provide (opt out!) controls for that. When I talk about privacy I'm talking about full control to the user, including the ability to say to Facebook, I am using your service, but there are things that I do not want you to know or re-use. And there simply is no setting for that. Anyways, I'll stop here, enough said already ;-)

Re: “Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You”

vanelsas — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 10:53:30 -0000

Two wrongs don't make a right. Just because the data was out there doesn't make their move correct in any way. A privacy setting has been added now to make something what was happening underwater a bit more obvious. The most important control is missing. I cannot protect myself from Facebook (unless I do not join). The fact that isn't possible makes the rest of their privacy controls less credible. You cannot seriously defend that Facebook is there to protect your privacy do you? Every new feature becomes opt out automatically. Where is the control in that. Think about this from a user stand point, not from the side of a developer or Facebook fan. I am not opposed to Facebook, but I do oppose a future in which they 'control' the social web and our identities.

Re: “Anything You Say Can and Will Be Used Against You”

vanelsas — Fri, 23 Apr 2010 07:34:58 -0000

I personally think we need to be extremely cautious about mixing up privacy with being social. They are entirely separate things. While I applaud the move to a User centric web, I also believe that privacy should never be sacrificed for it. Facebook clearly isn't there to protect your privacy (which is fine btw). They provide great technology to make the web more social, but they are making 3 mistakes with it.

1) This should have been opt in, just like everything else they have done so far. That would have been the decent thing to do.
2) The web is bigger (and should be) than Facebook. Calling it the 'open social graph' is just wrong. I can't 'like' via Facebook and get that like to Orkut can I? Trying to own our identity, and encapsulating everything in Facebook just makes them a big walled garden.
3) If Facebook protects my privacy, then where is the switch that protects me from Facebook? Can't seem to locate it.

On a side note. The line of reasoning that goes like 'if everything is open, you are forced to be real' doesn't make a lot of sense. Ask anyone in a repressed country what it would mean for them to be their real self.
Sorry about the longish comment. Wrote a blog post about it earlier that provides more detail.

Re: How Can We Expect Companies to Be Open If We Remain Closed?

vanelsas — Sat, 16 Jan 2010 03:56:35 -0000

To me the default really doesn't matter all that much. It can be open, closed, whatever. But the most important thing is to put the control in the hands of the user. We need to stop hiding behind 10 pages of complex terms of service that no one understands, and make it clear from the start what joining means and how you can affect that behavior.
To date I've never seen a better privacy/TOS than the one Google provides. They managed to write it down in 1 page of understandable language. Facebook's TOS on the contrary is way too complex, has changed 3 times to accommodate their need for more advertisement capabilities, and they obviously are making a mess out of privacy controls.
Good post and discussion Louis :-)

Re: How Can We Expect Companies to Be Open If We Remain Closed?

vanelsas — Fri, 15 Jan 2010 08:26:37 -0000

Louis,

I am concerned about the argument 'if you do not trust the companies, why should we trust you' reasoning. Too often privacy is narrowed to secrecy, trust, or transparency. Eric Schmidt recently said something along those lines in an interview "If you have something to hide, you probably shouldn't do it".

Privacy (to me) is isn't about hiding things, it's about freedom. It is about the user having the choice to share or not share. In many cases, the user doesn't have this freedom to choose. This isn't just related to the online world (think about the information you share about yourself with the government, bank, credit card company etc.), but the effects and possible repercussions online are much bigger.

We may be moving towards a world where everyone shares everything, but I somehow doubt that this is a conscious choice. Some give up privacy in return for value, many don't know they are giving up privacy when they join a site like Facebook. But most don't care. And my bet is that they don't care because they have no control over it. And if you have no control over it, why care.

We have a responsibility to give users that choice. Let them decide for themselves if they want to be open or not. Instead of setting the 'norm' to open and force people to be 'in' or 'out'.

I think I'll write something about this in a next post ;-)

Re: Paying To Pitch

vanelsas — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 07:31:23 -0000

I'm going to defend Fred here, not that he needs it ;-)

I've had the chance to sit down with him before, and this happened because he isn't sitting in some ivory tower. I've found Fred to be accessible and willing to take the time to hear me out. As an entrepreneur you will always need a good pitch to get attention from others (including investors). If you have a good story people will open up for you.

Re: Calling out Gabe and Techmeme over favoritism and censorship

vanelsas — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 02:55:21 -0000

Gabe, your Techmeme always seemed to be an independent news source to me, in a world where we all know stories are played. Your response here proves me wrong. It's censorship, no matter what angle you look at it. And that's sad.