Saturday, January 22, 2011
Ask a VC: The George Zachary Edition
That gives us just enough time to do this week’s episode of Ask a VC, starring George Zachary of CRV. Zachary’s investments include Twitter, Yammer and Crunchies nominee Millenial Media. Zachary is deeply connecting in the industry and can regale you with stories about working with everyone from the iconic Jim Clark to Elon Musk to Evan Williams and Jack Dorsey. He also spent some time in Hollywood producing movies with other ex-PayPalers, so questions about the Hollywood-Silicon Valley cold war are fair game too.
We film in just two hours so get your questions in NOW to askavc(at)techcrunch(dot)com
What Scares Twitter CEO Dick Costolo? Foreigners. (Well, Scaling For Them.)
Mike asked Costolo what he thought about the recent news that Eric Schmidt was being replaced as CEO of Google by co-founder Larry Page. You’d think Costolo would have some insight about the news simply because he himself just took over as CEO of Twitter, replacing Ev Williams, a co-founder (who also stayed with the company).
“Eric is on a bit different of a plane than me. I mean in the Gulfstream sense, not the other sense,” Costolo joked. “I think he’ll be fine,” he continued to laughs. “I think it’s going to work out for him.”
Mike quickly pivoted. “So far Twitter has been too cool for revenue. Is this the year there might be revenue?,” he asked. “There must and shall be revenue,” Costolo said with a laugh. He quickly corrected himself — “There already is revenue. There will be more revenue,” he said. “The next year, more still!,” he joked.
“We are focused on it,” Costolo continued saying that they have many products built for that purpose now. “That’s not one of the things I worry about,” he continued.
Naturally, Mike followed up with “So what do you worry about?” “International growth,” Costolo quickly replied. “You have to scale lanuages, regional support, data centers. Organizing all of that is a challenge,” he continued. “And not many [companies] have had to do that before,” Costolo said noting that it’s not like there’s a book on how do it.
Costolo also said that he was a Twitter user before all “the cool kids” signed up at SXSW in 2007. When Mike asked if Costolo knew then that this would be a good company, Costolo admitted that he did not. “I didn’t really get it.” That said, he still angel invested in it.
“Do you get it now?,” Mike quipped. Costolo laughed. “It continues to evolve.”
You can continue to watch the show live here.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Korg rolls out slimmed down nanoSeries2 USB controllers
posted Jan 14th 2011 5:42PM 
Korg's original nanoSeries USB controllers may have garnered some mixed reviews when they were released back in 2008, but the company's now back with some new and improved models that seem to address at least some of those complaints. As before, the lineup includes three different models: the nanoKEY2, nanoPAD2 and nanoKONTROL2, which can either be used on their own or paired up together. In addition to a slimmer design for each, all three are available in your choice of black or white, and it sounds like Korg has moved away from the plasticky, QWERTY keyboard feel that plagued the previous models, with the nanoKEY2 in particular described as having the same "great-feeling 'touch' that Korg has developed for its professional MIDI keyboards." Still no word on pricing or availability, but you can find all the rest of the key details at the link below.Is Google Planning Its Own Android Music Store?
The website GizmoFusion has posted the data and synchronization panel from what is purported to be a build of Gingerbread. This is the standard Android settings panel, except alongside the options for syncing contacts, Gmail and Picasa Web Albums is a new designation: Sync Music. Could this be a sign that Google is planning on rolling out its own music service, a la iTunes?
Google has reportedly been working on a cloud-based music service — subscription or a la carte — for quite some time. In a marketplace that is already crowded with options, having solid integration at a device level with Android could give Google an edge.
Of course, even without a specific music store, over the air synchronization could still be a compelling feature. At Google I/O back in May, Google showed off some technology that would allow Android users to stream music from their desktop computers directly to their phone. Presumably, this sort of feature could also double as a way to sync music and playlists.
That could mean, for instance, that rather than relying on third-party apps like DoubleTwist or manually managing a device’s memory card for adding/updating music, transfers could take place over the air. (Add a new song to a playlist on the desktop, get that new song instantly on your smartphone.)
GizmoFusion surmises that this is a feature that other versions of Android (including Froyo) could get as well. If this is something that is tied directly to a Google-hosted offering, we’re inclined to agree. Of course, it could also end up being one of the features planned for Android 2.4, codenamed Ice Cream.
Assuming the screenshot is real, are you interested in either a Google-based music store or the ability to sync music wirelessly? Let us know in the comments.
Image credit: GizmoFusion
[via Engadget]
Thursday, January 20, 2011
Android getting Google Music sync in Gingerbread?
posted Jan 14th 2011 2:04PM 
Google's been teasing cloud-based music features in Android since its I/O conference last year, and the recent leak of a revamped first-party Music app suggests that the plans haven't evaporated into thin air. Here's the latest tidbit: GizmoFusion claims that this screen shot comes from a device running Gingerbread, clearly showing "Music" as one of the accounts configured in Android's settings, which suggests that the system will be pretty deeply-integrated to sync your tracks just as it would your Twitter updates, your Facebook friends, or your calendar entries. Note that we don't have any new evidence beyond this one shot -- and we need to take GizmoFusion's word that this is a Gingerbread device -- but we're wondering if maybe this isn't one of the new features in that Android 2.4 build we've been hearing a lot about lately. [Thanks, Bryan]
So Much For Standards, Google Says WebM Plugins Coming Soon For Safari And IE9
Yes, plugins.
This is both humorous and terrifying on a few levels. First and formost, the point of all of this H.264/WebM stuff is so that the web can shift to an HTML5 video standard going forward. Of course, since neither IE nor Safari will support Google’s, Mozilla’s, and Opera’s preferred codec for that standard, we’re right back to plugin land! Why don’t we just call WebM, Flash 2.0?
Here’s Google on the matter:
Bottom line, we are at an impasse in the evolution of HTML video. Having no baseline codec in the HTML specification is far from ideal. This is why we joining others in the community to invest in WebM and encouraging every browser vendor to adopt it for the emerging HTML video platform (the WebM Project team will soon release plugins that enable WebM support in Safari and IE9).
In other words, they’re going to try to get Safari and IE users hooked on WebM by working around Apple and Microsoft. It’s an attempt to create a standard by way of plugin. Again, ugh.
And while somewhat interesting, it’s unlikely to work. And it’s a dangerous move away from working together on standards and instead is likely to piss off Apple and Microsoft.
Generally, plugins suck because they’re not standards. Even ubiquitous ones like Flash aren’t everywhere. And that creates headaches for web developers and surfers alike. There will never be a truly unified web with plugins. Even plugins backed by Google.
Update: Google has this to say in response:
The HTML
That’s a bit obtuse, but as I read it, that sounds as if Google is trying to say that the WebM plugin more of a “half plugin”. When I asked if that was a fair way to think about it:
Haha, yeah, a ‘half-plugin’ is one way to think about it. There are plug-ins that add non-standard capabilities to a browser that web developers can make use of but then their code is non-standard and reliant on that particular plug-in. This is not the case here. The HTML standard
So it’s a standard-compliant plugin. But still a plugin. Also, does this mean Apple will make a H.264 Chrome extension next? I’m only half-kidding.