spaghetti

I'm puzzled by the psychology too. It seems counter-intuitive that people who pay a relatively large amount for the device + monthly contract would balk at paying an additional relatively small amount for an app which increases the utility of the device.

I'm not 100% satisfied with any of my explanations. Here's a few ideas I've been pondering: the $80/month can be thought of as a subscription fee for the apps that come with the device. So I'm paying $80/month to use Phone, Mail, YouTube, Maps etc. The amount of time I can use my iOS device is limited by time spent at work, with family etc. Therefore adding new apps into the mix reduces the time I spend with the default apps. For example I might download a game and spend a month playing that and ignore the YouTube app. But now my "monthly subscription" for the YouTube app has been wasted. Say I use 10 of the default apps regularly. That's $8/month for each app. Ignoring YouTube app for one month means $8 down the drain.

So when I'm deciding to buy your $3 app I'm subconsciously wondering if it's worth $11. And that's if I only use it for a month. What if your app is really great and I use it and ignore YouTube app for 10 months? Then I'm paying $3 + 10 * $8 for your app.

Now take into account $200 for the device + $80/month is a lot for most people. And it's a lot relative to the free basic flip phone + $30/month w/o a contract we all had in the not too distant past. Now it's clear why free throw-away apps are the easiest to download. Free implies no additional upfront cost in addition to the arm + leg I'm already paying. Throw-away app implies I won't ignore the other $8/month apps I'm already subscribed to for too long.

It's just a theory and I'd like to hear some counter-arguments. If it's true it could have interesting implications on tweaking value and price of apps with the goal of maximizing revenue.

Yes that would probably work. I think the pieces of the signal in decreasing importance are: you purchase from a business frequently, the current time is close to the average time at which you purchase from that business, you're physically close to the business.

I wonder if physical proximity really matters relative to the other two pieces? Pizza places can deliver so even if you're across town the ad could still have value. Corner case is when you're on travel and physical distance is very large.

"spy CEO" wasn't my original intention. More like "figure-head whose intention is to benefit Google and whose loyalty is still with Google". Google's leadership is very shrewd and it would be foolish to blindly put this past them.

To be fair after reading a bit more and thinking about this it could be a vanity move motivated by the promo skip.

I'm skeptical of the "driving by the pizza place" examples. Physical proximity to the pizza place usually doesn't imply any intention to consume pizza. There has to be a stronger signal. I'm physically close to a pizza parlor and I just searched for "dinner and beer" would be enough to assume I have some intention of consuming pizza hence advertising the pizza parlor at that moment is valuable to both myself and the business.

Advertising based entirely on physical proximity could be almost useless. Imagine driving through downtown at 11 PM on a Friday night. As you pass the dentist you're prompted with "50% off your next teeth cleaning!". As you pass the park you're prompted with "Sunday Parade at the Park!". As you pass the liquor store you're prompted with "Beer sale!". Finally something useful. However by this point I would probably be ignoring the ads.

Wow that's hilarious and depressing at the same time. Intentionally maintaining a buffer of bad employees to keep your good employees around is the pinnacle of big company crap culture. If I ever have a company large enough for this type of problem I'll make sure that every manager can anonymously warn me if they start thinking like this.

Please elaborate on the "insanely capable engineer" part. I've read conflicting views, opinions and assessments of her qualifications. So I'm curious what exactly makes her an "insanely capable engineer".

If it's really about competition or payback then this will be amazing to watch! Valleywag probably just opened a few reqs.

Sometimes it's OK to let your imagination run wild. Especially when the 20th employee of thriving Google chooses to be the CEO of stagnating Yahoo.

"Try it before you buy it." Yahoo has something that Google wants: traffic. However Google probably has doubts about the health of Yahoo as most people do. So have a friend learn about the company inside and out and then make a decision: buy the company if it looks good or don't buy it of you find out it truly is thoroughly rotten inside.

I didn't. His accomplishments sound pretty awesome! My reply above was directed more at the article and it's lack of links to the guy's work. After watching the interview I just wanted to try some searches but there was no link.

If it's so great why aren't I using it right now? After my first Google search in 2000 I was hooked.

Does the article actually link to anything related to his computer coding? Oh wait here it is: http://www.cuil.com

What are you having trouble understanding?

I've often thought this was a good idea. The "interfaces" between the smaller companies would be far more strict and simple then interfaces between departments in a single large company. It's like the difference between buying a hamburger from a fast food chain which is extremely easy and asking a co-worker to sell you a burger which gets complicated very quickly.

Overhead in terms of office space etc would increase. However the simplicity of the necessary interactions between the smaller companies could turn the entire arrangement into a net gain for the parent company.

What did she contribute to Google exactly? Articles like this hand-wave through actual contributions with "influencing the minimalist and user-friendly interfaces of Google web search and Gmail" which is extremely vague and could easily amount to nothing.

Just bought my popcorn machine and home soda dispenser. Really looking forward to seeing this unfold!

Seriously though I'd bet that Google studied the value of Yahoo's traffic especially in Asia and decided getting someone on the inside makes business sense. Why should Yahoo take the fantasy sports cake for example? Wouldn't it fit right in at Google Plus?

Great summary. Welcome to big company life!

We over-value management because we over-emphasize approval seeking behavior. I find that people who reject the "do your work and get a treat" mentality place a lower value on management and a higher value on cooperation, creativity and so on.

While stack ranking sounds terrible on paper the actual implementation might soften the blow. Managers probably bend the rules a bit when it comes to the actual distribution in their groups.

For example consider two managers that both report to a VP. Each manager has 10 direct reports. If the managers and VP are all friends then the actual ranking distributions could vary a bit: one manager really has a strong team and the VP knows this. The VP also knows the other manager has a weaker team. As long as the VP's stack ranks are approximately correct in aggregate the individual managers probably have some wiggle room.

The point is politics in large organizations usually trumps strict rules. This can work both for and against someone hence some people don't view stack ranking in such a harsh light.

Yahoo is dying but it's not dead. All that remaining traffic has to go somewhere. Google has a clear incentive to take that traffic for themselves instead of letting fb or someone else have it.

Same for me when going back to 2nd gen iPod Touch. What really bugs me about the older iOS devices is the UI lag. It's not a huge deal if you use the device here and there. But where you use it constantly the lag becomes annoying. Hence my general desire to trade UI polish for decreased response time.

Google studied the impact of very small delays on users' search behavior. iirc reducing the search results loading time by 10 ms or so had a noticeable effect. I wonder if something similar could be applied to smart phone UIs? Might be an opportunity for a smart phone OS to substantially differentiate itself from iOS and Android.

More like Google just bought Yahoo.

Apple is a good example. Keep in mind that Apple was "turned around" by one of the founders. That's an example of re-aligning the company with it's original vision rather than altering the vision. I think the latter is much harder but I've never tried.

Trying to think of explanations for this. First thing that comes to mind is a Dilbert cartoon where the new CEO takes over to run the company into the ground. While Yahoo's news, shopping, maps and search traffic is probably only a fraction of Google's it's still worth something. Why not install an insider at Yahoo and slowly help the traffic move over?

Would be nice if only the supported artwork assets were downloaded to a particular device. This could help w/ the data caps issue. However there are corner cases like universal iOS apps.

I enjoy the high pixel density displays on small devices like iPhone 4. However the iPad 3's display doesn't really interest me. I just don't hold the device that close to my eyes.

Snappy, responsive UIs are the most important thing to me. I'll trade the animations, rounded-corners, gradients, drop shadows and bouncy effects for a more craigslist-like UI. Something that's simple, basic and functional.

At least when they do the screen won't shatter!!!!1

One mistake is working with people who say things like "don't make the same mistake twice." This type of fear-based motivation is counter-productive for both the employee and the employer. The new employee's self-confidence is already shot if they make a mistake. "You better not mess up again!" further undermines their self-confidence and starts a downward spiral. The employee feels progressively worse, their lack of confidence increases the probability of mistakes on the job and the employer's investment in the new hire is largely flushed down the drain.

I definitely prefer Linkedin over Facebook.

The multi-stage approach could work. When a developer creates a nice profile it will probably get interest from people seeking freelancers. You can then entice developers to add social identities with something like "123 people were interested in your profile. Verify your identity and contact them today!".

I forget how eLance does the identity verification. iirc it was on the thorough side. Perhaps more work than you want to invest now but perhaps worth it later.

Are they using this SDK in the Facebook iOS app? If so the ratings don't speak too highly of the SDK. If not why not?

Please provide alternatives to fb login. What are other ways to vet someone's identity or prevent outsourcing firms from creating profiles?