dominikb

We eventually raised from SV Angel, Floodgate, TechCrunch co-founder Keith Teare (Archimedes Labs) and others. We had enough offers to raise 1M, we took only 700K.

We didn't get much feedback during the interview; Paul, Robert and Trevor didn't give us a hard time, they actually liked the product. 10 minutes feels like a minute.

But the vision we pitched them was rough around the edges. We re-branded the product and changed market positioning completely right after.

Thanks :) We let small businesses create their mobile-optimized website from a phone. Check out http://mdot.it

Good luck everybody.

If you fail, don't worry, keep learning, iterating and hustling.

We failed last time, made some changes and then successfully raised from great early stage investors.

I agree. But we also thought it's not possible to cut video on a phone before iPhone.

Look around, millions of people grab 1080p and cut on a pocket device. Not just that, much more.

I was suggesting to be creative and think ahead. I am biased, but I believe it would work great and bring revenue to the table fast.

I see your technical point of view, but the average user market shows something else. People couldn't imagine doing stuff they do on a phone before iPhone. Now they do all sorts of mass content creation and they prefer it.

UI is just a matter of how much energy you put into it. It's not easy, but can be done. See iMovie, mobile bitmap editors, Garage Band... Difficult and unbelievable 5 years ago, but clearly doable.

If not phones, then at least tablets.

I do admit that I am a post-pc era freak though.

What's more likely - that you go to a resume builder website when your mate recommends, or download an app? What would you recommend - a cool app, or a website?

Apps are physical and cool. CVs should be fun to do. That's the future. Assuming that the desktop is a primary device for people in 2012 is just wrong. Also, CVs don't need to contain huge amounts of text; better keep it simple.

1. You're a geek, you prefer computers. Random people who need help with CVs don't see it that way. They take whatever they find.

2. They find the app because it's cool to try and use. Websites are boring and obstruct. Apps generate huge traction way faster. The in-app payments are also easier for users, no credit card forms.

3. Smartphones outsell computers by 20% every day.

4. Once you find a way to make the interface great on a phone, you can deliver to tablets easily.

Build future now. Change the pain to fun.

Make it automated and mobile: build a beautiful CV from an iPhone app, pay via in-app purchase and get 5 physical printouts delivered (also PDF in email and HTML version hosted for sharing).

Your sales will jump from $10,000 to $100,000.

Maybe you're complicating this. It's just a basic principle of capitalism and freedom. Etsy can give away their money to anyone they choose to, if it helps them commercially (or in any other way).

We should consider this socially acceptable for our own good.

Me and my co-founder had a "little" adventure recently with delivering rich text to iOS, including images and video, with HTML output and both way sync. You bet it was hell.

I wanted to show you guys and hear what you think. Check out our approach and the video.

Would this library work as a standalone product for licensing? Or should we just release the code after we ship the app?

Thanks!

The HUD is very difficult to photograph. I have one in 5 series and you can see it only from a direct angle. Only the driver sees the HUD. These promotional photos are completely fabricated.

From my experience BMW's HUD is the greatest feature of all. Very useful. The speedometer helps drastically, you don't need to shift eyes from the road. Much safer driving.

I disagree. You don't need any skill. Anybody can ship a crappy photo viewer in 72 hours.

But many people can't ship a quality photo viewer even in months.

What heavily distinguished Facebook from Myspace in 2006 when it became open to public was the product culture and quality. It took 3 years to build.

Although I completely understand the point of being able to make quick decisions and execute, the problem is far from solved after spending 72 hours on it. It takes at least weeks to deliver a good solution.

I'm 100% sure you've spent a lot of time with that viewer afterwards until you were confident users will have no problems using it.

Sorry, that is ridiculous. 72 hours is not even enough to analyze a fragment of the initial problems. I'm not even talking about coding yet.

Just starting to code some crap is exactly what's wrong with the current market. Anybody can do that. And for most, it won't turn out well.

What can you do differently? Invest more time and create something better.

How would it look if Microsoft and Google stood up to "help" and fight for Apple just because Apple's app ecosystem has unresolved patent issues? Hypocritical as it is, obviously they will stay quiet, they want Apple to be troubled for their benefit.

It will take a year to reconsider. Apple needs to act quickly and aggressively on this to show the public and media that they stand behind the developers. They can't let the App Store become a feared, shady, legal-gibberish ecosystem.

It's clear that their goal is to force Apple to acquire their patent portfolio. Clever trolls.

Apple claims that Mac OS X is "the world's most advanced operating system". But it's these details that I consider advanced and clever. Apple's marketing statements went from funny to offensive and unsupported.