User First Web

Just a quick reminder that Mobile Portland is tomorrow at 6 pm. Visit upcoming for more details and to RSVP.

Dana and I had a blast at Ignite Portland last night. The presentations were wonderful, entertaining and thought-provoking.

If you missed the event, you can still watch the videos of the presentations courtesy of Linuxaid.

One of my favorite parts of the evening was meeting people. Some of the people I met I’ve been following on Twitter. Twitter has contributed to a sense of community in Portland’s tech and creative circles that I haven’t seen before. It’s a wonderful thing.

While all of the presentations were interesting, I had a few thoughts I wanted to share on a couple of them:

• Where Does Imagination Go? — This may have been my favorite of the funny presentations for the night. It was riddled with Lewis Carroll-like quotes such as “Where does imagination go? I don’t know. Imagination can only go where we imagine it to go. And imagination has never gone where I imagined it couldn’t.”
• That’s Entertainment: Politics as Theater in Campaign ‘08 — One of the slides showed how politicians have to be performers. Bill Clinton had to play the sax. Mike Huckabee on guitar. It reminded me of running for student government in high school all over again. Except it’s not high school.
• Time for Portland to Take Its Place — Great stuff in this presentation. The ideas of following our passions, swing for the fences and build great companies. Portland is the place this stuff can happen. We just need to shoot higher.
• Beauty in Abandonment — It was great to see Peat on stage and Lyza’s photo. I didn’t realize Peat was a photographer as well. More to talk about the next time we grab lunch.
• A History of the Stick Figure — This was a five-minute version of the Helvetica documentary. Great info and history that I didn’t know.

To sum up the evening, Dana turned to me and said, “You better invite me to the next one.” Consider it done.

People are often surprised to find out that I’m introverted because I seek opportunities for public speaking. Why would an introvert like public speaking?

There are a few reasons including my appreciation for great oratory; the fact that public speaking is easier for me than chit chat; and it provides a forum to share ideas that I’m enthusiastic about.

The main reason I like public speaking is because I have little fear of it. I know public speaking is one of the top fears for most people. It used to be one of my top fears before I ran for student government in high school.

At my high school, there was a large assembly during which all of the candidates for office were given time slots to campaign for votes. I prepared a heartfelt speech about what I believed student government needed to do and how I would make sure it did it.

As I stood backstage worried about my speech, my apprehension quickly turned into terror. I watched each candidate get on stage and perform skits, sing, dance or simply act silly do make the audience laugh.

This wasn’t an election. It was a talent show!

I realized there was no way this didn’t end in humiliation. If I decided not to go on stage, everyone would know, and I would be harassed endlessly. If I went on stage, I was going to make a fool out of myself, and be harassed endlessly.

Guessing that I was screwed either way, I went on stage.

It was awful. See I made the worst mistake possible in high school. I took something seriously and was earnest. I was mocked, heckled, and a few people even threw things before teachers stopped them.

Thankfully, it was a short speech. But it didn’t end there. I was teased mercilessly on the bus ride home and the following day.

But then two amazing things happened.

First, I had some students who had never talked to me before tell me that they loved my speech and that my speech was the only one that was worth it for them. Second, within a few days, people stopped teasing me, and I had survived.

I was still gun-shy about public speaking for some time, but when I had the opportunity to do give a speech in college, I found that I had little apprehension. The reality is that nothing can happen to me on stage now that would be worse that the embarrassment I experienced in high school. And I survived that.

So now public speaking is enjoyable. I insist on being prepared and knowing my material well. I stress endlessly about making sure the presentation is perfect and that I’m telling a good story. But once I step on stage, I have confidence that nothing can happen to me that will top my high school experience.

After I left the high school’s auditorium, I didn’t want to face the world ever again. Now, I’m incredibly thankful I had that experience.

I’m going to be speaking at the PDX Web Innovators February meeting on Mobile Web and the upcoming mobile tsunami. I’m excited to have the opportunity to share my love for the mobile web and possibilities available for businesses and developers.

Here are the details:

Graciously Hosted by Nemo Design
1875 Se Belmont St
Portland, Oregon
February 13th, 7 pm
PDX Web Innovators
RSVP Here

In preparation for this event, I’m going to be starting a series of blog posts talking about the mobile market and how it mirrors the early days of the Internet. These posts are likely going to be posted on Cloud Four’s blog, but I’ll be sure to link to them from here.

Tonight we launched CloudFour.com. Tomorrow we pick up the keys to our new office. Friday we start painting and assembling furniture. If all goes well, we’ll open doors on Monday and start planning our office warming party.

We’re overwhelmed, excited, and anxious. What a remarkable thing it is to start a company. There is really nothing that compares.

So why another web development company? Here’s why.

First, my co-founders and I have spent the last several years doing very similar work, but for a very specific market. In some ways, we’re just continuing what we’ve always been doing, but with a larger public presence and in a different location.

Second, we’re see new opportunities in spaces outside of the niche market we worked in. We see opportunities to:

• provide web site optimization services to people who want to make their sites faster;
• help companies determine their new media direction and emerging technology strategy;
• and develop applications for the 2.7 billion mobile devices in the world—it won’t be long before others realize that 2008 is going to be the Year of the Mobile Web.

We’ve also got some exciting side projects. More on that later. ;-)

Finally, we’re thrilled by the idea of building a business and a culture together, continuing to work closely with our former colleagues, and meeting new people tackling interesting challenges.

It’s been three fast months since Guy Kawasaki’s video kept me awake with the realization that I wanted to start my own company. I’m proud to be working with such an amazing group of co-founders, and I’m pleased that we’re all sharing equaling in the creation of the company. We have an all-star team. If this was a pick-up basketball game, I’d feel guilty for having so much talent on one squad.

Most importantly, I find myself going back to what inspired me about that video and what compelled me to choose a different, more risky direction. I believe we have a chance to make meaning—to make an impact—in the lives of others. That means a lot to me.

So that’s what Cloud Four is about. We’ll have more to discuss in the coming months. If you know of someone who can use our services, we would appreciate you pointing them in our direction.

Everywhere I turn lately, there has been a discussion about brands and our relationship to them. One of the co-founders of Cloud Four, Lyza, wrote about Brand Affinity recently. My ex-coworker Chris Higgins picked up the theme on Mental Floss. Finally, Facebook’s recently unveiled its big advertising push with an emphasis on “Brand Fans” and “Fan-sumers.”

When Lyza and Chris write about their brand preferences, I find myself thinking that, yes, I indeed follow brands and buy brands. However, when I first read about Facebook’s new advertising plan relying on me declaring myself a fan of a brand, I laughed aloud. Yeah right, how many people are going to take the time to sign up to become a fan of Coke.

But if you read Jeremiah’s article on Facebook, he provides some convincing supporting data in support of Facebook’s brand pages. In particular, he points out that people trust the recommendations of friends and acquaintances more than any other source of information. Because of this fact, having your friends endorse a brand on Facebook would make a big difference in your decision-making.

The data is right. The conclusion is wrong.

Few people have blind loyalty when it comes to brands. I generally like Apple products (as do both Chris and Lyza), but I would never buy nor recommend that anyone buy an iTV. Because I generally like Apple products, I will look at their new products, but I don’t purchase them blindly.

And when I like something, I evangelize specific products, not the brand itself. I think this is true of most people whether we talk about Apple or Coca-Cola. People like specific products created by companies, not everything the company has ever done.

This is why I think Facebook is on the right track, but misguided in a fundamental way. They have taken a marketer’s approach to creating a relationship with brands when the real value comes from recommendations at the product or service level.

With all of the buzz this week about Google’s Open Social, everyone’s attention is focused on the web-based social networks and missing the impact of mobile technology on social media. Per usual, the Communities Dominate Brands blog is ahead of the game on this one.

In Tomi T Ahonen’s latest post on Communities Dominate Brands, Tomi points out that:

Informa’s latest Mobile Industry Outlook report for 2007 reveals that yes, mobile social networking services did continue their dramatic growth for the past 12 months, and are already worth over 5 billion dollars in 2007.

$5 billion dollars! This again dwarves the revenue associated with web-based social networks. Tomi’s post echoes one of his posts from a year ago where he put the then $3.45 billion in mobile social networking in perspective:

3.45 Billion dollars this year! Wow. A bit of context. All of iTunes revenues last year were about 400 million dollars. TV-interactivity (voting for Big Brother, Survivor Island, Pop Idol etc) were worth 900 million dollars. Internet gaming revenues, all multiplayer games etc, were worth 1.9 billion dollars. All internet adult site revenues were worth 2.5 billion dollars in 2005… Oh, just to be clear - that mobile digital content revenue is more than all (non-mobile phone based) online social networking revenues combined. In only two years, the mobile side of digital communities has shot ahead of the online world. Amazing!

There you go. If you weren’t previously convinced that mobile is the next big thing, it’s hard to dispute the fact that today’s big thing—social networks—is already bigger on mobile devices than on PCs.

There is huge hole in the Internet that Kathy Sierra filled. This morning, I looked again for some signs of what Kathy is doing now, but her site is still dormant.

We’ve lost such a eloquent voice for building businesses and products that people are passionate about. It’s been months now, and I don’t see anyone being able to fill the void.

I miss Kathy Sierra and still hold out hope that one day she will return to blogging.

After hearing such a buzz about Twitter and Facebook at Web Visions 2007, I decided to give them both a try. Five months later, the results are completely unexpected to me: Twitter seems indispensable and Facebook completely ignorable.

My initial impressions were very different. Facebook had a clear purpose and reason. While I’ve never got much value out of MySpace or Friendster and minimal value out of LinkedIn, at least I understood why someone might find them useful. Facebook’s common features with these other social networking sites made it easy to see what Facebook was about.

Twitter on the other hand seem like a tremendous waste of time. I believe that the high interrupt nature of today’s workplace is already straining productivity. I’ve changed my email client to only check email every 30 minutes, stopped participating in IM and irc but irregularly, and generally sought ways to give myself more focus.

It was difficult to imagine that a system like Twitter with constant micro-updates would work for me.

Five months later and I’m contemplating turning off my Facebook account while I both enjoy and find utility in Twitter. How did this come to be?

Let’s start with the easy answer on why Facebook disappoints.

Dave Winer wrote recently about how Facebook sucks because it doesn’t allow users to control their data. This triggered a lot of back and forth about the value of Facebook. I’m not sure if it is control of the data or the walled garden or what, but the reality is that I never see what is going on in Facebook.

I think Facebook’s expectation is that I’m going to log into their system and refresh the news feed page. I’m not sure. I’ve tried turning on every type of notification and subscribing via RSS to no avail. I’m in several groups, but I never know that anything is happening in them.

Basically, the only time I think about Facebook is when someone writes an article about how great it is. Then I log in to look again and wonder what I’m missing.

Yes, Facebook has a wonderful development platform. I like the fact that I can syndicate my blog, twitter, delicious and flickr information to Facebook. It means I never have to log into Facebook to update anything. :-)

Maybe more of my friends need to use the platform. Maybe I need to “live” in the application to appreciate it. But for whatever reason, I’ve given Facebook five months to hook me, and I still could care less about it. And I’m actively trying to understand this system. I doubt others will take as much time.

Twitter’s purpose is much more difficult to explain. Adam C. Engst’s recent “Confessions of a Twitter Convert” mirrors my own experience. Twitter provides both a way to know what is going on in people’s lives, a conduit to breaking news, and a community that you don’t find elsewhere online.

It also provides you with a conduit to talking to people you otherwise have no connection to. My exchange with Guy Kawasaki allowed me to give something back to someone I admire. That connection would have never happened without Twitter. I don’t have Guy’s email address. He doesn’t know me at all.

Who knows? Perhaps in five months more of my friends will be on Facebook, and I’ll suddenly see why so many people swear by this service and think it can take on Google. And maybe Twitter will grow old or become crowded with spammers.

But for now, Twitter provides a difficult-to-describe joy and usefulness to my everyday. Facebook promises much more, but doesn’t deliver.

(You can follow me on Twitter here. My Facebook account is… well, I don’t think I can link to my Facebook profile. So I guess you have to search for me. How lame is that?)

A couple of weeks ago, I wrote a post where I theorized that social networks were having an impact on our ability to create and keep in contact with many more acquaintances, but don’t redefine our definition of friendship as some have suggested. A study by Sheffield Hallam University has recently been released that says that, “close friends are unlikely to be made through social networking web sites such as Facebook and MySpace.”

The article on the study points out that social networking sites “may be having less impact on people’s social lives than might be expected.” The research shows that people really only have about 5 close friends—the same number that people had before social networking sites—and that those close friends are met face-to-face.

So social networking is about acquaintances more than friends regardless of how many “friend” request you accept. The thing that surprised me most about the research was that people might have actually expected social networking sites to change the dynamics of close friendships.