ideabreaker

Are your SMS messages disposable?

What is the value of an text message beyond the first read?

Most, if not all people archive email messages in one manner or another and many also employ various strategies for the management of incoming communications.  Folders and sub folders, tags, categories, and priorities come to mind.  In fact there are quite a few purpose built email management tools that are practice based and technology based.  Pay It Forward and other GTD variants come to mind.

I routinely have to search and sift through accounts and folders containing thousands emails in search of important tidbits.  In fact  is such a valuable tool for my email management that I am seriously considering forwarding all of my accounts from thunderbird to gmail just for the sake of better search.

So again, Is SMS disposable? The anecdotal evidence strongly supports the idea that it depends greatly on who you ask.  I am constantly using the search functionality of my blackberry to dig up appointents, schedules, addresses, etc. out of past text messages.  My sister actually gets her weekly work schedule through SMS.  Nearly all logistical communication within my church takes place via SMS. So I view text messages as being highly relevant.  Ask the next guy and not so much.

There seems to be quite a lot of people in the read once and delete camp.  The next logical question is why.

1. Is it this because most of the information exchanged is simply unimportant or shallow?
2. Is it because the the information is time sensitive and not really relevant enough to be maintained past the initial reception?
3. Is it because there are no real mechanisms available for gracefully handling the task of applying CORe (Collect, Organize, Review/Refer) principles to this messaging medium?

A fourth and possibly most important question was raised in a recent ReadWriteWeb article on the shuttering of SMS slanging startup Kwiry.

4.  Is SMS destined to forever be a thin experience?– “It’s really a shame but we have to wonder - did this happen because people don’t really want anything complex from  their short messaging service?” 

Now that is a good question.   In fact it is the question that I was really asking to begin with.  While I am grateful that SMS messages are included in my blackberry’s global search results, the signal to noise ratio is very high.

Is there room for a service that brings basic (but dedicated) organization and archiving to your SMS communications?

Tags: CORe, data, information, SMS, text message, Unified Message Model

Paradox

Let me start off by saying that I like words.  I like the nature of speech and text equally.  I love to read.  I love to write.  I love to read and write.  I started reading AlmostPerfect last night at 11:30pm and finished it at 3:30am and all from an uncomfortable chair.  I am a huge believer in the necessity of knowledge transfer and I am convinced that words in whatever form are the best medium for accomplishing that goal.

I like to talk.  Ask around.  It is somewhat of a running gag that I talk like no other. (In regards to frequency primarily but I hope in regards to quality of material as well)  I have actually received a recommendation on linkedin that deals specifically with my propensity for yakking.  No, seriously.  Check it out here.  I have a history of taking over meetings, conversations, and generally derailing the arguments of others by simply outlasting them.  I have been likened to a walking filibuster.  It can really be a sad state of affairs.

Of course I am overstating the truth for sake of humor, but suffices to say that I like words.

I am especially fond of certain words.  In particular words that are often misrepresented, misspoken and missused.  To be precise, I am exceedingly fond of the persuasion abused by the general public and starting with the letter P.  No, seriously.

Off of the top of my head words like: Paradigm, Prognostication, Propensity, Prototypical, Processing, and Protracted come to mind.  Yeah.  Words that either start with the letter P or are in reality P words hiding under a Prefix.  Like imProbable, unProductive, unPrecedented, and the like.  Today I am centering on the word Paradox with a Particular Purpose.  The word Paradox is one of the most abused, misunderstood, and ill-used words in all of word-dom.  This is not necessarily about the history of the word Paradox but about a certain Paradox which has up until today befuddled me.

I would first like to share Websters take on Paradox in the form of definition 2, type C: “–an argument that apparently derives self-contradictory conclusions by valid deduction from acceptable premises”  Wow that is beautiful.  Case and point for the sake of this piece is my affinity for longwindedness.  As is evidenced by the lengthy nature of this post, I have no issue with making myself heard and understood.  I regularly take part in 1000 line IM exchanges as a manner of business and archive all of them for posterity and legal purposes.  I sift and send 1000s of emails, power through my rss reader sometimes twice a day, and regularly trap people on the phone and in the corners of events when I am excited about one thing or another that either we or anyone else is doing.  It is  a large part of my responsibility to our operations.  

What a Paradox indeed that while all of this is true, I cannot manage to blog consistently.  It is the epitome of feast or famine.  In fact I think that my last post was somewhere in the neighborhood of 2.5 months ago.  It has bothered on a low level for many months and I have asked very successful bloggers to sort me out to no avail.  Well, I think that I cracked the nut.  I am not going to let the reasoning or my strategy out yet as it is decidedly untested, but I will revisit this subject as  soon as I have some measurable data.

As always, any thoughts, advice, strategies, and commentary is most appreciated.

“Will It Fly?” Round 3: Depth and Width

Or– “How I am applying Evan Williams’ process of concept evaluation to ideabreaker’s present ventures”

Question:   How much value can you ultimately deliver and how many people may ultimately use it?

“The most successful products give benefits quickly (both in the life of a product and a user’s relationship with it), but also lend themselves to continual development of and discovery of additional layers of benefit later on.”

One thing to consider in the “agile” age of application development is this:  You can release a product that delivers a degree of shallow value quickly and then expand the depth of the value proposition in an iterative way.  In fact, I would have to completely disagree with the end-all, be-all strategy.  Attempting to release a product based upon a 5 year roadmap for a version 1.0 is ludicrous (although once the primary way of doing business).  You cannot underestimate the gift of reexamination and adjustment.  This tool goes out the window when you paint yourself into the strategy of having one shot.  If what you ultimately release after years of protracted development suffers from fundamental flaws in design, usability, functionality, etc., guess what:  You are screwed and the chance of recovery is slight.  The Chandler Project comes to mind (although they have finally shipped a semi-usable 1.0 albeit an eternity after getting started.  See this for more details.)

“Most things are deeper than they seem at first glance. Practically any application, once people start using it, can be used as a lever to more activity and benefit delivery. Being smart about what you’re leveraging is key.”  I would have to completely agree with this statement.  There are countless examples of this truth. The majority of “serious” people were of the opinion that social networking sites (now referred to as tools) were nothing more than another distraction for teenage girls.  Who would have thought that i-google was so wonderfully extensible that it would become an utilitarian platform capable of assisting in life management and time saving.  The more that any product is utilized the larger the degree of power that can be exacted from it.  The caveat is that it has to be tractable and obvious enough to elicit the degree of usage necessary for the discovery and expansion in the area of depth.  This principle isn’t limited to software, but the user (or customer) base is key.

In keeping with that sentiment, there are plenty of successful companies with very shallow ideas and products.  Their success is determined by the width of their userbase and the width of their product line. 15 shallow products are completely capable of producing the same degree of revenue as one incredibly deep product.  Likewise, a shallow product with 15 million buyers is as lucrative as an incredibly deep product with 100k.  Just like tractability and obviousness, there is always a trade-off between depth and width.  As Evan states and asks in the original piece, “They are usually inversely proportional—do you try to offer the mass-market good or the niche one?”  That is of course a question that has to be addressed on a case by case, line by line basis.  More importantly an accurate answer to this question is only revealed by a trip through the fire.  In the end, although the answer will usually not be readily apparent to anyone involved at the onset of a project, it is certainly to be considered.

Of course there are the rare occasions where you find both depth and width in large measure and that my friends is where the billions are made:  “Google, Windows, Ebay. It’s easy to think these kinds of opportunities aren’t laying around anymore—at least not for the little guy. But most people would have said the same before Facebook entered the picture.”  Amen brother Evan, Amen.

And now the quick and dirty assessment of depth and width as it relates to our current ventures:

1.  ANViL has proven to be incredibly deep as far as we are capable of observing.  It seems that there isnt a day goes by where we don’t discover another angle, usecase, or function to discuss or exploit.  However, we are not going to follow all of these potential rabbit trails today or anytime soon.  We want to qualify our assumptions with feedback from our users.  In terms of wideness we feel internally that it will prove useful to every man, woman, and child in the civilized world but as discussed above there is no reliable metric for that.

2. Voleu is certainly wide.  This is not up for debate as we have been able to apply the platform to 8 (and counting) clearly defined market segments with no problem.  Depth is certainly TBA sometime down the road and will be heavily dependent on the innovation and patterns exhibited by our users.  Taking into consideration the minimal barrier to participation both financially and technically and I think we are dealing with an 80/20 width to depth ratio.

3. Lastly Firmalab.  Wilikers it is hard to determine.  It is a product that is capable of producing huge value and reward for all interested parties, but it isn’t cheap in terms of commitment.  Truly a case of something only working if you work it.  The depth of this venture is only limited by the creativity and depth of it’s users.  It is literally boundless.  Width is another question all together for previously mentioned reasons.  The width of Firmalab will almost certainly be determined by the success of early adopters in using the platform.  Thankfully, early adopters have an uncanny way of being successful people.

That’s it, another one in the can.  Ask yourself the question:  How much value can you ultimately deliver in the end and how many people may ultimately use it?  That is not only a credible question, but one that both users and potential investors alike are in the business of speculating on.  Trust me, securing a niche in which you can reduce an obvious pain point is a great place to start.  It is much easier to expand your value proposition and address additional markets when you have the traction of a small but vocal base.  Listen:  You will never get to the point of having to ask that question if you cannot first answer the simpler question of “How much value can you deliver right now?”  Can you even communicate effectively what value you are capable of delivering at any level?  All very important questions that are much less painful when asked sooner than later.

Next: Discoverability.

“Will It Fly?” Round 2: Obviousness

Or– “How I am applying Evan Williams’ process of concept evaluation to ideabreaker’s present ventures”

“Everything is obvious once its successful.  Big wins come when you can spot something before its obvious to everyone else.”   That one statement is really indicative of the entire life cycle of a startup effort.  A starup ceases to be a startup when it reaches a particular degree of market eminence and financial success.  I would love to go deeper into that, but we are looking at is how obviousness applies to ideas and more precisely products.  In Evans piece he lays out his system of gauging obviousness:  “There are several vectors to this: 1) Is it obvious why people should use it? 2) Is it obvious how to use? 3) Is it an obviously good business?“

“Is it obvious why people should use it?”
This should not be an afterthought or some random strategy session.  You need to decide up front what kind and degree of utility you are providing to your intended base.  What value is going to be derived from partaking in this particular idea, technology, or product?  This is hugely important and yet not enough.  In addition to producing something that is innovative, that is utilitarian, and that provides value, you must make it readily apparent to your audience that they should use it.  I can give you example after example of approaches, and ideas, and applications (some of which we invested heavily in) that were brought forth only to realize that while wonderful on paper, there was either no obvious real world application or if there was it took 30 minutes of explanation to get the point across.  If you find yourself in this place, scrap it and start over.  It will add years to your life.  If after going back to the drawing board, you arrive in a similar place then it may not your idea that’s the problem but your approach and/or presentation.  I have been there, and while it can cost you money and certainly time  it is still infinitely better than banging your head upon the wall on the first pass.  You will tire yourself and your team out, and kill your startup.

Is it obvious how to use it?
I ran into an instance just the other day while evaluating a task/project management application.  I fired it up and went through the process of putting it through it’s paces.  Within ten minutes I arrived at the conclusion that this particular application was worthless.  I wondered what in the world would A. Cause someone to build this?  and B. Cause people to use this?  Just by chance, for one reason or another I happened to log back in.  I then realized that there was MUCH utility in this application and that the approach was brilliant.  This was caused by an attempt at making the application more obvious! The culprit was a pronounced tutorial obscuring the workspace with pre-populated sample data in the various fields.  Now maybe that was me being impatient and not wanting to follow the flow.   Regardless, just the other day I had a close friend and project manager by trade tell me that he thought the app worthless as well.  After explaining to him what I discovered and convincing him to take a second pass, he called me up proclaiming the usefullness.

Is this an obviously good business?
As Evan points out in the original post, this one is sneaky because while you of course want your business to be good, you don’t necessarily want that to be common knowledge.  One of the keys to keeping a competitive advantage going while heading into the marketplace is staying just below the radar.  There are quite a few techniques to maintaining interest and momentum without making it obvious as to why you garner interest and momentum that I might discuss at a later date. If your business, idea, or concept is obviously good to you and your stakeholders, but not so much to potential competitors you are in a good place.

Internal assesment of obviousness:

Anvil is one of those things that was intensely obvious to us internally, but that caused quite a bit of head scratching.  Why would I use this?  How is this better than [insert competitor]?  Is this really a problem that needs solving?  This was frustrating and it was not until we were in a position to demo before a group of people did it start to make sense to them.  We had something that was genuinely useful that was not at all obvious, and when it became obvious that it was useful it was obvious that it had usage issues.  Like I have said before we scrapped the entire application and started over–several times.  We arrived at the same place, corrected the usage issues and the presentation problems and now because it is anobviously good business, we don’t talk much about it.

Regarding Voleu, I would have to agree that it falls into the most narrow category. “Sometimes you can come up with ideas that are highly tractable and obvious…products (that) were not hard to launch and yet, were immediately appealing (to their target market).”  As discussed before, Voleu is something that we designed, mocked up, and prototyped in what amounts to a weekend. (it wasn’t pretty but it worked)  It is very apparent to it’s several target markets, and the space that it seeks to compete in is incredibly lean having only 3 real competitors.(with only one in a for-profit model)  We completely expect Voleu to attract quite a few new players to market but that’s the nature of the game.

Firmalab is fairly obvious, but only to those that have experienced the particualr brand of pain that it seeks to offset.  Universities dealing with technology transfer, entrepreneurs looking to flesh out conceptual ideas and build businesses, corporate interests that seek to supplement thier internal research and development.  (There are more but that would make the business too obvious:) I was at a Net2NO meeting last night speaking with David Crais about Firmalab.  David is one who feels strongly that this is a market which is going to experience tremendous growth by order of necessity.  I’m not sure if that is good or bad for us at this point, but I certainly believe it.

So seriously, take a little intangible inventory.  How obvious is what you are presently noodling or working on?  How definate a picture can the market capture about your particualr solution?  What could you do to ensure that the concept stays obviouss while it’s obviousness stays not so obvious?

“Will it Fly?” Round 1: Tractability

Or– “How I am applying Evan Williams’ process of concept evaluation to ideabreaker’s present ventures”

In our last episode there was a bit of a foundation laid regarding the reasoning behind this exercise.  Today we get in the ring.  The first element we are going to look is Tractability.

Question: “How difficult (financial, technical, time consuming) will it be to launch a worthwhile (meaningful, useful, well conceived, and approachable) version 1.0?” –(parentheticals mine throughout)

“Tractability is partially about technical difficulty and much about timing and competition—i.e., How advanced are the other solutions?”  – For example with ANViL we are attempting to break into the BPO (business process optimization) space.  BPO consists of project management applications, CRM, innovation capture and management, ideation etc.  There are a LOT of players here.  I have personally kicked the tires on 100’s if not 1000’s of these applications.  It is a fascinating market because the landscape is vast and bleak simultaneously.  A 1000 potential solutions, but room enough for 15 new apps in my RSS reader every morning.  1000 players yet none have sufficiently addressed the needs of enough users to win.

“In general, if you’re tiny and have few resources, tractability is key, because it means you can build momentum quickly—and momentum is everything for a startup. However, tractability often goes hand and hand with being early in a market, which has its own drawbacks.”– We are tiny.  We have few resources.  Tractability is key for us and I can never overstate the importance of momentum.  We are a startup.  A startup can die on less than a single week of stagnation.  Sometimes you have to stop everything else that you are doing in order to manufacture the stuff.  We have become experts at the fabrication of momentum.  It is why we have been in business for almost 10 months with almost zero finacial support.

Alas, momentum is not enough, nor is releasing a useful product.  Fact:  There is a team of 19 year old kids hitting the net right now with a new “solution” to your problem.  There is only one way to maintain the precious tractability necessary for success:   You must be nothing short of extra-ordinary.  If you are not then you will quickly find your way to the archives of ReadWriteWeb, WebWorkerDaily, TechCrunch or any other number of application graveyards your life governed by a heaping pile of “almost”.  Being extra-ordinary is not impossible.  Only difficult.  And it can be done.

The greatest example that I can pull out of thin air of a company and a product that are doing it right now is Producteev.   Take a look and a listen and you will see that this little application is everywhere.  I will have 2-4 more entries in my RSS reader tomorrow morning to go with the 35 or so that are already filed away.  I assure you that this would not be the case if they were yet another basecamp clone or @task emulator. (of which there are plenty)  No, because instead of attempting an incremental improvement or a fresh coat of paint, you MUST truly innovate while producing utility.  There is no other way.  Producteev’s team has forgone Gannt Charts in favor of humanity and placed an emphasis on communication over micromanagement. This isn’t just novel, it is meaningful. (It also doesn’t hurt that Ilan seems to be a pretty excellent human being)

So just like that and out of thin air, Producteev is now our primary competitor, whether Ilan and his team know it or not.  I don’t want to sing the praises of this app, but I am not going to be dishonest either.   I have used it and it is wonderful.   I am not going to sit here and tell you where Producteev misses it or how it could be changed.  And I am not going to tell you how exactly our approach is different or how we are better.  That is not what this is about because there are others  attempting to ride this possible paradigm shift. (caused by Twitter and Pownce)  There is Staction, Harvest’s Co-Op App, and WiseHive already, with another one of them hitting the market every week.  This never ends and it isn’t unique to our market.

Because of this dynamic you must innovate.  You must make noise.  You must do it with as little as possible and you must do it well.  I am confident that we are, but what about you?  How tractable is your present project or venture?  I hope that I can demonstrate a few different ways that you can reach tractability by looking at a few things we are working on.

Tractability Assesment:

ANViL is fairly tractable primarily because although technically challenging, research intensive and time consuming it is going to change the way that individuals, teams, and businesses create, organize, manage and share information.  That is serious.  It is a fundamentally different approach that is more effective than anything that we have come into contact with.  And this is coming from a team that has scrapped 100’s of wireframes and 2 complex prototypes that were very well received to get here. We are excited.

Voleu is incredibly tractable but for a completely different set of reasons.  We coded and deployed 3 functional protos in 2 weeks and are in the process of refining a 4th.  There is very little competition in the marketplace addressing these several sets of key specialization.  As a bonus, it is a meaningful addition to the human experience and is accessible enough to have been used by people over the age of 80!  Tractable: Check!

Lastly, Firmalab is tractable as well.  Less so than Voleu because it is a fairly complex platform with a lot of ins, outs and usecases.  It is also an example of a culmination across multiple market spaces.  The value proposition is unique, but I am not sure if that helps or hurts.   The primary kicker for Firmalab is that it is a product and service which adds value and enriches the lives of those that may not have access to the tools and resources necessary to be successful. We have met no one who can argue with that point.

So there it is:  A discussion on tractability and an assesment of where we stand regarding it.  I promise that the remaining posts will not be nearly as lengthy as this one so hang tight.

Next: Obviousness

“Will it fly? How To Evaluate A New Product Idea.”

Or– “How I am applying Evan Williams’ process of concept evaluation to ideabreaker’s present ventures”

“I‘ve been thinking about a number of new product ideas lately. In doing so, I’ve been trying to come up with a more structured way of evaluating them. Here’s a first attempt at defining that. It’s not as clear as I’d like it to be. But perhaps you’ll find it useful.” –  I have found it incredibly useful.  I only wish that I would have come across this gem a year ago when it was first published.  I promise you that it could have saved me quite a bit of frustration.

This is very important:  I am an idea guy.  This is an idea company.  We have worked very hard to ensure that as a team we do not pursue vain imaginations. We simply cannot afford to.  We are a startup in the truest sense and resources come at a painful premium. But as confident as I am that our approach and processes are valid and effective, I am also secure in the knowledge that we do not have all the answers.  This truth has served us well in our efforts because it has given us the ability to be fluid and dynamic in our operations and to apply criticism and counsel without offense.

What would I pay for the opportunity to have an individual as effective and successful as Evan Williams vet ideabreaker’s projects and products?  Obviously, a cost cannot be placed on such an intangible but guess what?  By applying this process you are able to do just that.  The only caveat is that it takes a degree of faith, humility, and confidence to open yourself up to such a thing. Thankfully I posses all three in large measure.  I said all of that to say this:  This will help your business.

Evan discusses applying 7 different criteria to smash against your product, idea, concept, or theory to test it’s overall culpability.  I am going to go through them in the same order smashing them against our projects and discussing the resuslts.  I am going to touch on one per post starting tomorrow with tractability.

Stay tuned.

No one can escape the transforming fire…

…of machines.

Those words sound as though they could have been copied straight from the pages of one of the Terminator scripts,  and although they very well might have been (as I haven’t thoroughly checked), they are most certainly the opening words of Kevin Kelly’s book New Rules for the New Economy .  I am not going to copy/paste snippets of reviews to get you interested if the links above and the references to trans-formative burning are not enough.  And I’m not going to give you bullets on the 10 “rules” because I want you to read the book.  No, instead I just going to let you know a few simple facts and truths:

1.  This book was written as an extension of a piece produced for Wired Magazine where Kevin Kelly is executive editor.  The original text can still be found on this page in Wired’s archives.   The rules are the same but it is certainly a little less on the flair.  This is what we call an excellent example of raw prognostication.  In other words, predicting a future that one can certainly not know at present based upon indicators present in ones time.  I included raw in the description because unlike a lot of these 20th+ century sooth sayers Mr. Kelly does not try to sound infinitely smarter than his audience.  He just sorta seems to be.

2.  This is less a fact and more of an observation and opinion, but New Rules is on a level, or at least very close to the magnitude of The Third Wave and Future Shock.  I am a vehement fan of Alvin Toffler and his lesser know collaborator, muse and wife Heidi.  I read The Third Wave at 22 years old after finding it in a box of books at my grandparents home.  In fact, I think that I read it twice in a week.   While some of the subject matter in Toffler’s works can be seen as a bit more controversial and deserving of a screenplay, what I am pointing to is accuracy.  New Rules is decidedly money.

3.  Quite a few people/ observers/ reviewers have commented in the past that Kelly’s writing style is muddy, or jargony, or that his statements are overly hyped, or that he makes use of hollow evidence and abuses supposition.  This is straight up BS written by individuals that either didn’t get is, didn’t want to get it, or wish they would have gotten it first.  Fortunately due to the fact that it is 10 years later you can do nothing other than get it.

4.  The age of this text does nothing to reduce it’s potency as an effective business operations and strategy tool-set.  Again, remember this was in gypsy terms: “fortune-telling” back in 1997.  It was written for today whether anyone knew it or not

In short:  1.  This is something that your really must read if you haven’t already and 2. This is something that you really must read again if you have already read it.

It is available in paperback for less money than it would cost you to print the web version, which you can find here tucked away on kk.org.  Or as rather different option, you can do as I have done and subscribe to it via RSS.  Mr. Kelly made the decision to re-release New Rules in blog format releasing two posts a week.  This practice began on the 15th of December so you can catch up rather quickly and/or subscribe there.   You may be asking yourself the question, “Why would I want to read a book as a series of posts over a period of weeks?  Who reads books like that?.”  Well, for starters,  I do.

I am finding that a particularly useful strategy with this “book via blog” is to read the entries when they hit my feed-reader and then follow the link back to the site and read the it again in addition to the last entry to reestablish context.  This may seem like quite a lot of work to read a book no less, but I can assure you that the tenets and indeed the majority of the content and theory/fact(s) is right on and can/will be beneficial to your perspective in business and beyond.  If this made sense in 1997, how much more sense does it make today.  Like I said above, it is Toffleresque.  So do your business a favor and subscribe to  the New Rules Blog.

A Note On Customer Service…

I received an email on December 24th from Asus.  Technically it was from AsusTek, which is the division of Asus proper that is responsible for the production of notebook computers amongst other things, but I digress.  I was puzzled to receive it as I have NEVER received a single email from Asus although I have been faithfully using their hardware products since the late 90’s.  I was even more shocked to find that this email, which was in the form of a Christmas card (Yes Christmas, not a generic “holiday” card.) and it made zero effort to do anything but thank me for my business and remind me that their customer service department is ready to move on my behalf 24 hours a day, 365 days a year.  No salesmanship, no special deals, no “ACT NOW!!”, no “72 HOUR SALE!!!”, just a simple and remarkably heartfelt thank you.

“With all good wishes for a brilliant and happy Christmas season, we wish the merriest of Christmas to you and your family.”  Wow.  I have to tell you, the subtitle under the ASUS logo which has been expanded to read: “Rock Solid and Heart Felt” helped to put the icing on one of the most sincere greetings that I received all season.

A few things to note:

1.  In over 10 years of using Asus’ products for both personal and professional purposes, I have never ONCE had to call their customer service.  Their hardware truly is Rock Solid.  So much so that I went with  AsusTek on the purchase of my last notebook computer.  A game that they have not been in for very long at all.  I paid $1200.00 for it 21 months ago and it still outguns the majority of machines you will find at a box store in every area but battery life.

2.  This is the first piece of correspondence that I have ever received from Asus.  No fliers, product comparisons, specificicatory data sheets, sales materials, or otherwise.   I would look forward to one on Easter, Fathers Day, my birthday, the Vernal Equinox, or any other time they want to drop me a dime.  I trust this company now more than ever.  This token of appreciation was truly Heartfelt.  The only negative takeaway is the fact that I am now expecting a piece of hardware to bend balloon animals at my sons next party.

3.  As much as I would hope all of these other dysfunctional idiot box companies would get wind of this little act of kindness and realize what it could do for ones business, it wouldn’t work in the majority of cases.  You can’t subtly draw attention to your seemingly non-existent customer service department if your consumers are constantly in need of customer service.  My two year old has pulled the laptop that I am typing on right now onto a tile floor more than once with only scratches, and nearly every component under the hood is user serviceable.   I donated a HEAVILY abused 3.0gz P4 machine that I built on an Asus motherboard to my church in 2005 after many years of use.  It sits in a dusty soundbooth in a warehouse used for youth outreach and has been running sound, video, and presentations for worship services  never complaining once about the usage or environment.  (I really could go on and on…)

4.  No matter how much I would like to, think about, and almost might purchase hardware from another manufacturer often at lower prices, I just can’t pull the trigger.  It doesn’t take much to cause someone to NOT buy your product, but it takes a whole lot to cause someone to NOT not buy your product.  Asus has effectively driven me to that place through their Rock Solid products, and it will be a Heartfelt decision every time I purchase one going forward.

Merry Christmas Asus,
Jeffrey R. Lyons Jr.

The Journey

Not sure why, but I actually got an itch.  I think it might have been the fortune cookie I got with dinner tonight…  It said “you don’t have to know where you’re going to be headed in the right direction.”  I’m not sure why this struck me, but I soon began to ponder the validity of this simple, yet provocative phrase.  Could this be true?  Is it always true?Before I tackle that one, I can tell you from experience that the inverse is certainly not true.  Just because you know where you’re going, does NOT mean you are headed in the right direction.  I think we’ve all experienced this.

So as stated, is this true?  Well, I guess that depends on the trip you’re taking.  One could easily argue that this statement is foolish on a number of levels, but on the surface I really do think there is some truth to it even if only at a philosophical level.

I think we all tend to put unnecessary pressure on ourselves because you don’t always have to know everything before you dive into something.  In fact, none of us can really ever say we have all the answers .  Sometimes you just have to make a leap of faith.  I think this is why collaboration is so important.  After all, It really is about the journey.

But then again, don’t count on my assessment here.  I, for one, am putting more stock in the lottery numbers on the back…

- Dave

ideabreaker awarded 40<40

“Wow.” –  That was the only response that I could really come up with when I learned that both David and I had been nominated for Gambit Weekly’s 40 under 40 award.  Gambit Weekly is Louisiana’s largest weekly newspaper reaching over 250,000 readers a month in print and many more online.  Each year in November, Gambit publishes their 40 under 40 issue recognizing leaders in community service, volunteerism, education, athletics, art, business, technology, music and more. …an annual look at some of the young people who are making remarkable contributions to the New Orleans metropolitan region.  In short, it is a tremendous honor to even be thought of regarding this award.

So we received the news, processed this unexpected blessing, chuckled and went back to work.    Then about two weeks ago David and I were working online and discussing one thing or another when he relayed the news to me that we had been selected as recipients.  I think that I simply responded with:  “Shutup.”  About the exact second that I began to type my scathing follow up to his sick sense of humor, my blackberry went off.  It was the email from Kandace Power Graves; managing editor of Gambit Weekly that David was referring to in his message.  “Wow.” once again.

We got our first look at the Nov. 4th issue last night as well as the other 38 recipients of this award.  The reception was held at the beautiful Louisiana Artworks on Howard Avenue in downtown New Orleans.  It was a terrific event in every way and well orchestrated, but by far the greatest aspect of the evening was meeting the amazing people whom we were blessed with sharing this honor with.  This group of individuals really demonstrates the diversity that continues to be New Orleans greatest strength.  Community activists, writers, engineers, educators, technologists, musicians, actors, and entrepreneurs of every race, color and creed imaginable.  This is the nature of Southeast Louisiana and it is a beautiful thing.

Fortunately for everyone in attendance I did not have an opportunity to speak :)  But if I would have had the opportunity, the chief thing that I would have wanted to communicate to everyone there is that David and I are only part of the equation here.  Our present successes and those yet to come are tied directly to our team and we do not want to ever lose track of that.  Then entire 40 under 40 experience is based almost entirely upon the past, present and future exploits and achievements of ideabreaker.  ideabreaker is a company composed of amazing people who are all bonafide world changers in my humble estimation.  This is as much for Michael, Lee, Jay, and Jody as it is for David and I.   Those are the facts and certainly worth noting.  I would also like to give a shout out to the individual that nominated us for this award.  I don’t know if it is proper to state your name here, but you know who you are and we are wholy apreciative of your confidence in our company’s vision.

Interestingly enough, three of the other honorees were also members of Net2NO.  Net2NO is a technology and social media centered group that David and I have been members of since day one.  Andrew Larimer  from  The Nola Project, Tiffany Starnes from Trumpet Media and Lauren Baum with 504ward.  I thought it pretty cool that over 10 percent of the 40 under 40 recipients meet together regularly to discuss technology driven issues pertinent to this area.  Pretty cool indeed.

You can find the 2008 40 under 40 right here on Gambit’s website, or you can pick it up at any number of news stands and businesses here locally if you are in town.