Webware

After contributing to the destruction of productivity at work by helping Facebook through its early days, Dustin Moskovitz and Justin Rosenstein are launching a new service aimed to make people and businesses productive once again. The company, Asana, announced details today on its funding. However, details on the service itself are still vague.

Here's what we know: The company just raised a $9 million venture round lead by Benchmark Capital with additional funding from Andreessen Horowitz. Marc Andreessen is an advisor and will not be on the board. Benchmark's Matt Cohler, formerly at Facebook himself, will be.

The rest is borderline hand waving. I talked with Moskovitz and Rosenstein this morning about their vision, which anyone who's ever worked can relate to. The product that embodies this vision, though, we don't know much about.

Rosenstein told me, "We started Asana to change the way people manage information, and speed up work by an order of magnitude." They're going to help individuals and teams become, "vastly more productive," he said.

We want more, of course. Rosenstein: "We're not trying to be stealthy, but it's tricky to describe."

Try, please? Here's a bit more: Asana will improve work by solving problems of information transparency. With Asana's hosted service, status meetings will be unnecessary. Organizing yourself and communicating what you're doing should be the same act. We'll fix the explosion of information that knowledge workers need to manage. It will be a software solution to a human problem.

Asana is answering the question, "How would you design productivity for the Web from the ground up?" The founders believe they have hit upon the necessary data and interaction model to improve all of our jobs. You can read more on the Asana blog, if you dare.

We'll believe it when we see it, won't we?

Rosenstein did say the Asana team is using the product internally. He also said that Asana will be a Web app, but that they're trying to provide software-type speed and responsiveness from it. Good.

The product is being built on a new programming system, called Lunacript. The platform itself will be open to users, so they can code in their own business processes. However, all apps will be hosted by Asana, not federated, as Google Wave allows.

When I get a demo, I'll report back. Until then, I don't hear anything that leads me to believe that Google Apps, Microsoft Office, and Lotus Notes have much to worry about. I would very much like to be proven wrong.

Bonus fact: I asked Moskovitz how he felt about Jurassic Park actor Joseph Mazzello being cast to play him in "The Social Network" movie about Facebook. "We are both scared of velociraptors," he said. "That's about all I know."

Google is hosting a press event at 10 a.m. PST at its Mountain View, Calif., headquarters to update the world on its plans for world domination via the release of its second operating system (after Android), the Google Chrome OS (FAQ). Google VP Sundar Pichai and Engineering Director Matthew Papakipos will reveal technical details and launch plans, and will have demos. Google will be streaming the announcement.

I'll be in the audience when the event kicks off and will be live-blogging my thoughts on the talk as it happens. Josh Lowensohn will be handling reader feedback during the live blog, so if you want to share your observations on what's happening or have questions, please contribute in the live blog window below once the event goes live. Stephen Shankland will also be at the site to grab photos, and Tom Krazit will have the full news rundown and analysis after the event closes.

Tuesday night, I asked Justin Kitch, who sold his company, Homestead.com, to Intuit in 2007, how much Intuit paid for the company. "$170 million," he said. "No," I said, "That was Mint. How much was Homestead?"

"It's funny, isn't it?" he said. Both Mint and Homestead went for the same price.

Coincidence? Intuit also bought another company, Paycycle, in June of this year. Guess for how much. That's right. $170 million.

What the heck is going on at Inuit? Do they have a stack of pre-printed $170 million checks? Do they only like companies as they pass through that magical valuation number (as decided by their own analysts)?

Intuit says this: It's a coincidence. And, I've been reminded, the company has made non-$170 million buys: MyCorporation.com in 2005, for $20 million; Digital Insight (2007) for $1.3 billion; Electronic Clearing House (2007) for $131 million; and Entellium (2008) for $8 million.

I still think if you're selling a company to Intuit, you should ask for $170 million. It's a figure they're comfortable with.

Blog platform company Six Apart is adding a free, miniaturized blogging service to its paid blog hosting service TypePad. The new TypePad Micro service is essentially a simplified template, called Chroma, for unpaid users on the TypePad service. It will likely be compared with Posterous and Tumblr.

The Chroma template is flexible and attractive, and most of the blogs I've seen using it look good. It's a great format for short posts and for sharing pictures and embedded videos.

But as a short-form blog authoring platform, TypePad Micro is still TypePad, a powerful and capable blogging system that may be overkill for people who just want a way to post quick items. The main Quick Compose interface is nice and light, but one level down, the options are overwhelming. In comparison, Tumblr's posting interface is light and clean all the way through. Posterous' Web interface is even leaner, and if that's still too much for you, you can start blogging on it via e-mail, without even setting up an account on the Web site. (To be fair, you can also post to TypePad Micro via e-mail.)

Still, what Six Apart is doing with TypePad Micro is probably good for Six Apart and it's definitely good for writing and writers. From the product perspective, CEO Chris Alden believes that there's a somewhat open space in the blogging world between full-on blogs like TypePad and micro-blogs like Twitter. He envisions TypePad Micro as a good starting point for people who want to say more than they can on Twitter and don't want to pay for it (thus putting TypePad Micro in competition with the free Wordpress.com). He also sees it as a supplementary blog template for paying TypePad customers who want a new outlet for quick posts.

And if you care about writing, as I do, you'll love the new micro formats like this one, since they encourage people to write shorter posts. Since you have to think more when you're writing for a small space, this is good.

The TypePad platform also integrates into the modern world of Twitter, Facebook, and the like: Every time you post, the platform can automatically send alerts out to dozens of other accounts. And stealing a feature from Twitter, Movable Type lets readers "follow" TypePad blogs.

TypePad Micro is live now.

Wikipedia killed the encyclopedia business, in print and online, as it's hard to make a revenue model work that involves paying people to create content when there are hordes of enthusiastic experts around the world willing to do the job for free. The business of mapping may be similarly doomed, as indicated by PublicEarth, a new wiki-style database of places launching Monday, and by the continued improvement in authoring tools at the crowdsourced mapping service OpenStreetMap.

PublicEarth

PublicEarth is an open database of places. Michael Rubin, who was an architect of Netflix, wanted to bring the same "element of delight" of connecting people to things they enjoy. Netflix did it for movies, and Public Earth is doing it for locations.

As with other crowdsourced place databases, anyone can insert a location. And as with most of the other products, PublicEarth uses Google base maps. The difference in PublicEarth is in the execution: It's slick, in a good way. For map users, PublicEarth lets you quickly find categories of locations -- romantic, kid-friendly, historic, for campers, etc. -- for places you are going. When you're looking at a map of places, you can get a lot of data by just rolling your mouse over hot spots, without clicking. "We learned how expensive a click is," Rubin says.

The system will have a recommendation engine that learns what you like. So if you've been using the system and then head to a new town you can just see the "recommended for you" locations.

The real value to PublicEarth is that it can find places that aren't, as they say, on the map. It's very easy for users to create a point of interest, draw a boundary line around a park, or trace a route to walk or hike. If enough people get into this system it could be a great resource for travelers. Which is the business model.

The PublicEarth team wants to make this service the go-to database of unusual places, and to partner with standard booking sites like Hotels.com, OpenTable, and travel solutions like TripIt. Getting traffic from those sites will get people into the system, and then sending booking and ticket traffic out to venues will generate revenue.

PublicEarth is also being marketed to activity groups like RV and sports clubs, parents groups, birdwatchers, and so on. It can be used by social networks to collect and collate locations aimed at specific interests, which can help people with those interests when they visit a new region.

Of course, success hinges on contributions, and it's not easy to create a user-maintained location database that sticks. There's also competition: Wikimapia and Yelp come to mind. But if PublicEarth can affiliate with other travel resources it could work out. It is a very strong product. It has the potential to compete with the guidebook market.

OpenStreetMap

PublicEarth is an open database of items on top of a map. OpenStreetMap is a crowdsourced map itself. The project was started before Google Maps came on to the scene, and while the search juggernaut's global road map is certainly more popular, there's a lot to be said for the OpenStreetMap approach. The fact that anyone with an interest in an area can create, correct, or update a map means you can get a lot of very specific data onto the map, created by people with very specific, nearly microscopic, knowledge of their regions.

And since the OpenStreetMap data itself is open, developers can do anything they wish with it. With a commercial map like Google's you have to push everything through one API, but with a truly open system you can create your own maps from the data, perform calculations on map points, and so. OpenStreetMap would be a great mapping database for the calculation engine Wolfram Alpha.

Later this month a new map editor, MapZen, is coming to the system from CloudMade, a company that commercializes the OpenStreetMap project. MapZen will make it easier for mappers to create and correct roads and points of interest. An iPhone app, currently in approval limbo, will also make it easier for anyone to walk and map. And new social tools should be good for to help groups of "map buddies" coordinate their work.

The MapZen/OpenStreetMap combo also lets you do very specific and modern cartography. There's a junction editor, for example, that lets contributors specify turn restrictions by time of day.

CloudMade will monetize the system by offering search features and routing (with awareness of the junction turn restrictions), and possibly by working on location-based advertising.

OpenStreetMap currently matters more to people in less-mapped regions than to dwellers of hyper-mapped U.S. cities. But ultimately the system may enable new location-based apps and services thanks to its wide-open system.

The crowded map

Google has already added a form of crowdsourcing to its mapping services: Its traffic system gets location and speed data from its mobile users. (Users can get their own raw data through Latitude, if they wish.) But Google relies on its own private mapping data, and its own servers to deliver maps to users. It's an expensive model and it doesn't serve all users in all locations equally. The crowdsourced mapping model is a serious competitor to the proprietary map business. I wouldn't have thought it could work, but Wikipedia shows that it's a mistake to dismiss the power of millions of individuals, each willing to chip in a little bit, to create great reference works.

SAN FRANCISCO--At the NewTeeVee Live conference on Thursday, YouTube director of product management Hunter Walk announced that the video-streaming service is getting a new high-quality streaming option: full HD, or "1080p" resolution. The current "high-quality" option, when available on YouTube videos, is 720p, referring to the number of horizontal scan lines that make up the image.

Walk said the new resolution, as well as a new full-screen player, will roll out to all users within days.

YouTube co-founder Steve Chen announced high-quality YouTube viewing at NewTeeVee 2007. He also said, then, that YouTube stores all video it receives at the resolution it's uploaded at. So when YouTube ads a resolution option, as it did then and is doing now, it simply needs to re-encode videos for the new player, not get new raw content.

Walk said that about half of the 1080p content in the YouTube database has been re-encoded so far.

Only about 10 percent of playbacks on YouTube are now in the high-quality player. Walk said that this is due in large part to the fact that for many viewers, hardware or bandwidth limitations prohibit high-quality viewing. Also, more content is coming in from mobile devices than ever. "We've seen about a 2,000 percent increase in mobile uploads this year," Walk said. Update: A YouTube spokesperson contacted me with this correction: "This is incorrect. It's HD uploads that have grown from 1% to nearly 10% over the course of 11 months."

Other changes afoot at YouTube: The team remains interested in a non-Flash video player. "We're interested in broad accessibility," Walk said, reminding the NewTeeVee audience that the company has demonstrated an HTML 5-based YouTube player. "We keep an open mind," he said.

The online video directory service Clicker launches Thursday at the NewTeeVee Live conference. If you watch TV, you will love this site.

Clicker is not a full-on video search engine like Bing or Google, and it's not a video-viewing site like Hulu. It is, instead, a carefully curated directory of full-length video content, with several extremely nice features and user interface flourishes that make it a good first stop online if you're looking for an episode of your favorite show to watch.

Unlike a search engine, Clicker won't give you every last shred of online video on your search query. If you're looking for the "Dr. Horrible Sing-along Blog" on Bing or Google, you'll get hundreds of clips and related videos. On Clicker, just four: the three 15-minute episodes individually plus all of them combined into one long stream. Each video also has a very good "Related" sidebar showing other videos that are thematically linked. No matter what I threw at it, I found the Related suggestions pertinent.

Clicker's behind-the-scenes engine is constantly crawling video sources to add and remove content as necessary. The "remove" part is key, as many networks take episodes off the Web as frequently as they add them.

In the Clicker interface, an auto-completing search box that's focused just on video makes it incredibly fast to find content. Searching within a show (for example, looking for "Clinton" in the Daily Show page) is also very fast, as the search results change in real time as you type.

When you want to watch a video, Clicker plays it either by linking to the source, such as aggregator like Hulu or a network site like that of CBS or AMC, or it displays an embeddable player. This depends on the content owner's terms of use. Some content is not available for free, but Clicker knows that it can be streamed on Amazon.com or Netflix; Clicker will direct users to log on to their accounts on those services.

This service does an amazing job of taming the morass of online video, and I cannot recommend it highly enough. The site has been in private beta for a few months; it is scheduled to go live Thursday at 10:30 a.m. PST.

What's next

But this isn't the end of the story for Clicker. The shame of this product is that it is in many ways a better television experience than you can get on your TV. Unless you connect your computer to your living room TV, you're going to have to sit in front of your PC or laptop when you want to watch a show. A partnership with Boxee will yield a better set-top-like experience for the service, Clicker CEO Jim Lanzone told me. An iPhone player will follow next, and the service will be smart enough not to find videos you can't play on that device.

From a business perspective, advertising will become a part of the model, although Clicker won't try to get in the way of pre-roll videos from the content sources. In some key vertical content areas, though, like health and finance, Lanzone thinks there's a good opportunity. Also, Clicker could end up driving traffic to sites like Hulu and could potentially monetize those click-throughs.

The challenge for Clicker is to get viewers to know about it. A strong SEO effort will be applied to get Google searchers to the site when they're looking for shows. That will help. There may also be privately labeled versions of the service for various institutions. But--and I rarely say this--this service is good enough to grow organically. Once you try Clicker, you'll be back again.

Listen to a Larry Magid discussion with Clicker CEO Jim Lanzone.

Listen now: Download today's podcast

The entry hall in my house has been a test bed for home monitoring cameras for years. I like to be able to record people coming into the house and see what's going on around the front door. Anyone with a family and occasional babysitters will understand. So I continue to look for simple, robust video-monitoring solutions, and vendors keep obliging by improving the state of the art in home remote cameras.

The latest: Two interesting and very different products, Avaak's Vue and the Astak Mole. Both are very easy to get up and running, and neither require monkeying with arcane router settings to get offsite access to the video streams--something that can be a problem with the Panasonic BL-C131a cameras that I otherwise favor. (I've also tried the Logitech WiLife system, and find it quite good.)

The Vue
The Vue is the most unusual remote camera I've seen. The product is unchanged from my March 2 preview, but I had a chance to experiment with the shipping version recently. The big benefit of the Vue: The cameras are tiny, battery-powered and thus completely wireless, and the system is extremely easy to set up. You plug an included controller box into your router or switch and tuck it out of the way, and then you can place the cameras anywhere in your house on their clever little stick-on magnetic dome mounts. The standard kit comes with two cameras.

The Vue is great for monitoring a location but there's a big downside: The cameras don't have motion sensors. If they did, the batteries wouldn't last. So you can see what's happening when you want, or record images on a schedule, but this product doesn't work as a security camera. It is very easy to share the output from a camera with friends, though. A two-camera kit is available now for $299.

The Mole
I also recently received the Mole, from Astak. This is a single camera for $299, but unlike the Vue cameras, this unit must be plugged in for power (it has Wi-Fi as well as Ethernet for connectivity). It can be panned and tilted by remote control over the Web, so one camera can see more than two Vues in some setups.

The Mole also has infrared illuminators for low-light capability, and a microphone, so you can see and hear what's happening at all hours. Since the camera is always on and can see in all conditions, it can also watch for motion and perform actions--alerting you and recording video and stills either to the Web or to its own memory card--when it detects movement. It even has a speaker so you can talk back through the camera. It is black and industrial-looking, however, befitting its name --not so great for installation in a nice white-painted hallway.

... Read more

IT pros will often tell you that a lot of consumer technology isn't ready for the enterprise. It's not secure, it's not priced correctly, it can't be administered, yada yada. That doesn't stop businesspeople from using consumer tools in their jobs, though. It just stops the people who make the tools from profiting from their use.

Where there are IT administrators, there are budgets, and where there are budgets, there's market opportunity. And I'm not surprised that two very solid personal productivity tools are getting business versions this week and business models to match.

The Outlook add-on maker Xobni on Monday released Xobni Enterprise, a new version of the product with links into traditional business data sources. While the free and Plus levels of Xobni will search Twitter, Facebook, and LinkedIn to give users more information about the people who are e-mailing them, the enterprise version will also tap into Salesforce.com, Sharepoint, and corporate directory services. It can also be extended to work with proprietary business apps. This could be pretty cool: users will be able to see latest internal database info from people they're communicating with them, automatically when they're doing the communicating.

And to help IT teams keep their users in line with whatever (ridiculous and restrictive) policies their companies have on employee access to outside data, Enterprise Xobni admins can also turn off access to the app's Twitter features and other parts of the product.

Admins, of course, can provision employees' computers for access to Xobni data from a central console.

Xobni Enterprise starts at $30 a user a year, with prices going down with volume or up for access to enterprise data sources.

On Tuesday, the cloud file synchronization product SugarSync gets a business version design for teams. The Business version of the product features pooled storage and central IT control. Customers pay for each user ($10 a month) and for the storage they want, in 100GB increments. Admins have access to all this storage, too. If an employee leaves the company, they can disable access, and then sign on as that person, and recover data. There's no "remote wipe" feature to remove company data from an employee's computer, but CEO Laura Yecies told me she's thinking about it.

A useful feature lets users send files to other people via the SugarSync service, instead of through e-mail. This could compete with the useful, but single-purpose and somewhat expensive product, YouSendIt, except that SugarSync's single-file transfer function can't password-protect files.

In the cloud sync category, SugarSync lagged its major competitor Dropbox in releasing of a free, limited version of the service. There's one now, and Yecies says, "We're finding that free is a good business." She bases this on "conversion" to the paid product, which she says is 5 percent to 10 percent, depending on the offers presented to users.

I use and pay for my own SugarSync account and highly recommend the service. Compared with geek favorite service Dropbox, it's got more flexible configuration options and better mobile device support. The business version freaks me out, personally--I don't want any IT manager getting access to files my hard drive--but this sounds like a good product for the security-conscious IT exec who wants to provide a team file-sharing product along with off-site backup to users.