I love Ask a Ninja. It’s one of the fun things I can do with Patrick.
Fun to see the two guys behind that videoshow on Geek Entertainment TV.
Do you watch that?
If you don’t like that, well, Ze Frank has the worst sex toy … ever.
Here’s the trick to learning to love Google Reader. First, I visit http://reader.google.com. Second, I import my OPML file from NewsGator. Third, I go to “All items.” Fourth I learn to use the “J” and “K” keys. J goes forward through all the items. K goes backward. Then I click on things that I want to share with you.
There’s a meme out there that only rich people will be able to afford Playstation 3′s. That’s bulls**t.
Let me tell you how it works in the US of A. You walk into Best Buy. Ask for a credit application. Fill it out. They approve you for $10,000 on the spot (as long as you’ve paid all your credit card bills on time). You head over to the big screen department, pick out your $4,000 big screen and your $600 Playstation 3, and a $500 HD-DVD drive. Then you pay something like $140 per month in payments.
Can’t afford that much? Then get a screen that costs about $1,500 instead.
Now, how much is that? Well, a movie, hotdog, and Coke, for four people will cost you about $60. So, for two movies with your family you can afford a kick ass bigscreen and gaming system.
There is WAY too much being made about the price of these things.
I was reading Steve Ballmer scratching his head in BusinessWeek where he was wondering about the valuations that are getting paid out for companies like Skype and YouTube.
Good to hear that Ballmer’s leadership on the social software industry has remained consistent since he turned down Flickr when that sold to Yahoo for $30 million. I, and others, told Microsoft’s execs to start buying everything that moved in the social software space cause we knew that valuations were gonna be much more expensive later on. The executive leadership at Microsoft didn’t believe us. Still doesn’t.
Don’t miss Ballmer’s question here: “[You've got to ask] could Google do whatever it is they’re hoping to buy without paying $1.6 billion?” That’s Microsoft’s engineering culture coming through. Clearly Ballmer believes he can build YouTube for less.
The thing is, YouTube is two SEPARATE things: 1) the technology. 2) the community/brand.
Doing the technology is fairly straightforward. I’m sure that could be built for $100 million or less. Probably far less if they really are smart about how they go about it.
But duplicate the community and brand (er, those eyeballs, as Ballmer calls them) is far far far more difficult. The fact that he insists on calling me a set of eyeballs tells me Ballmer doesn’t understand the trend here. Why we love YouTube isn’t cause we can watch other people’s videos. It’s cause we can upload our own lame videos!!!
Now, will Microsoft be able to spend less than $1.6 billion and build their own YouTube? Maybe. Why? Cause Microsoft will have to spend hundreds of millions (probably more than a billion) in advertising just to attempt to appear “cool” and get people to try its video service.
Even then, as AT&T has demonstrated, spending a billion on marketing is no assurance you’ll come out the other end with a good audience and with people thinking you’re cool.
Google realized it couldn’t make its own video service look as cool as YouTube. Too bad Ballmer still hasn’t figured out he can’t buy his way into cool without buying some things that are cool.
Back to Facebook. Is it worth as much as YouTube? I don’t think so because only college students associate with that brand. With YouTube everyone from 80-year-old friends to my son were using it and talking about it. Facebook is struggling to make its brand interesting to non college students. So far it has failed, which is why I don’t think it’s worth as much as YouTube.
This was Maryam’s first interview — ever. I thought she did a good job and even told me to shut up at one point.
I learned that Eric Billingsley designed nuclear power plants before coming to eBay. Since joining eBay he designed its new search engine, among other things. I talk about all that and more (and get some cool eBay demos) with Eric Billingsley.
The search engine he built is really interesting and hearing Eric talk about trying to make Google and other engines work is fascinating. Remember, everything in eBay needs to be found in the search engine and found NOW. Google doesn’t get new items into its index for days. That’d be totally unacceptable for eBay.
Lots of good stuff on my new link blog (done thanks to Google Reader). I read hundreds of feeds so you don’t have to. There’s a feed here too. Everything on there is less than a day old right now, so feel free to surf through all the pages.
While I was reading my feed I saw Matt McSpirit talking about Blinkx, which is a video search engine. So, why didn’t Blinkx close the $1.65 billion deal that YouTube did?
Well, for one, the name. I can say YouTube even after drinking four beers. Now, how do you tell your friends to use Blinkx? I can’t even spell it. I had to look at the logo three times just to make sure I was spelling it right. If I can’t tell my friends about something new your growth won’t be as fast. Make sure I can say your name on radio. Or on stage when I’m talking. YouTube works. Blinkx doesn’t.
Also, the home page is WAY overbearing. Too many moving things. And one design principle I learned in college: pick ONE thing and make that twice as big as anything else on the page. YouTube wins here. Why? Because your eye needs something to enter the page with. If everything is the same size, as it is on Blinkx, your eye feels uncomfortable. Doesn’t know where to look. And instead of picking something will just leave. Dave Winer reminded me of that last night when he said he hadn’t watched any of my show because there was too much for him to pick from. He wanted a page design like Ze Frank or Rocketboom have: just one video. On my ScobleShow, I pick one video and make it bigger than the others.
Back to the home pages, Blinkx has lots of big-name videocontent. Movies. TV shows. Etc. YouTube has lots of “small-name” videocontent. Kittens. Goofy videos. We’re all looking for different kinds of content. Stuff to impress our friends with that they probably won’t have seen. Here’s a hint: your friends and family have probably already seen the latest Lost. But they haven’t seen the latest cute kitten video. Microsoft makes this mistake too (remember IE 4 with ActiveDesktop? What was there? Big name media companies. No small guys. I wonder if Microsoft will learn that it’s the small guys that make an experience different and interesting?)
It’s not hard to see why YouTube built a brand name and audience worth paying billions for. And why Blinkx didn’t.