With Google Play For Education, Google Looks To Challenge Apple’s Dominance In The Classroom

img_8595

Google I/O, the company’s sixth annual developer conference, got officially underway in San Francisco on Wednesday, and it was an eventful day. It took the company every minute of its epic three-hour keynote to unfurl a laundry list of announcements and updates, seemingly across every product category in its arsenal — from Android, Chrome and Search to Maps, Google+ and Hangouts — each with a fresh coat of paint. We even saw the arrival of Google’s very own subscription music service, today, which is already being touted as a potential Spotify killer.

Amidst Larry Page’s triumphant return to the stage (after addressing his much-discussed vocal issues yesterday), Google’s soaring stock price and sexy smartphone demos, it was easy to miss an important announcement concerning Google’s foray into a considerably less sexy market: Education. (And K-12 education, no less.)

Android Engineering Director Chris Yerga took the stage to introduce Google Play for Education, through which Google hopes to extend Play — its application and content marketplace for Android — into the classroom. The new store, which is scheduled to launch this fall, aims to simplify the content discovery process for schools, giving teachers and students access to the same tools that are now native to the Google Play experience.

Teachers will now be able to search for and recommend learning content by category, grade level, and a variety of other criteria, and will have the opportunity to discover content recommended by other educators, for example. What’s more, every piece of content served within its curated portal is pre-approved by educators before being posted, so that teachers can rest easy knowing the recommended content is quality and school-appropriate.

Google has already begun to recruit content partners, with NASA and PBS among those that have already signed on to make their content available to users when the store goes live this fall. Yerga said that the team plans to begin accepting content submissions from developers at some point this summer.

Today, Apple is far and away the de facto leader in the education space, but with its new educational app marketplace, Google is clearly positioning itself such that it can begin to make a real play at challenging that dominance. To that point, the real key to Google’s new product is the fact that it enables administrators to distribute applications to their entire team. If a teacher wants to shoot content to a couple hundred Android devices, they simply have to type in their group’s name and voila, Google will push that sucker out to everyone on the list.

Another important perk for cash-strapped teachers is that the marketplace doesn’t require them to use credit cards to purchase content. Instead, educators have the option to buy apps and content in bulk and charge those purchases to their account. These are important features for educational users, removing a great deal of the friction around acquiring learning content.

Not only that, but, while schools and educators are eager to bring apps and other digital learning tools into their classrooms, it’s critical for them to be able to manage and to bring some oversight to the content distribution process. Plus, the Android Marketplace, er, Google Play, has had a long-standing malware problem, so that extra layer of teacher control can help get schools over the hump.

While the penetration of Apple’s mobile devices into education is significant, when it comes to other hardware, IT departments don’t want to deal with the hassle of networking iDevices. Plus, Apple products are expensive — and especially for bulk orders, schools will want to turn elsewhere.

Where Google can have a real advantage over Apple is in its ability to combine Google Play for Education with Google Appls for Ed. Small businesses have been adopting Google’s productivity software in droves, and the interest has started to grow among school boards who want to introduce tablets into their classrooms and use Google Apps as the standard.

Together these two products can work hand in hand in the classroom, with each becoming more powerful as a result. In turn this could help create the incentive or leverage that it needs to begin attracting new users.

The biggest takeaway: If it weren’t already abundantly clear, Google is no longer just a search company. The company has been exerting tremendous effort to achieve a unification among its products, not only in terms of design, but in the way its products interact with each other. That is best demonstrated by the fact that Google products now touch just about everyone. In a sense, Google is becoming a utility provider — for both consumers and developers — and, in turn, a data company.

While Apple has long been focused most of its attention on design over the years, Google’s focus on utility has allowed it to build a massive infrastructure, collecting data from across a broad range of software products at a nearly unprecedented scale. For me, there’s no better testament to the utility and wide application of Google’s infrastructure than Education.

Naturally, in juxtaposition with sexy new smartphones and mobile technology, streaming music services and re-imagined social networks, Google’s work in Education tends to end up in the backseat. But, for this reason, Google has quietly (and quickly) gained noticeable traction in Education, thanks to the adaptation of its utilities and gadgets, like Google Apps and Chromebooks, to the learning market.

For example, in February, Google announced in February that Chromebooks are now in over 2,000 schools across the U.S. For awhile now, Apple has grabbed most of the attention in the education space thanks to the rapid adoption of iPads among schools and teachers. Furthermore, when we talk about Google having positioned itself as a provider of essential utilities, there’s probably no better than the company’s recent announcement that the entire country of Malaysia — that’s 10 million students, teachers and parents — will use Google Apps for Education as part of the country’s effort to improve its education system.

Through its Google Apps products, Google allows students and teachers to collaborate in realtime through Web apps, while using already-familiar tools like Google search and Gmail. The other part of this is, Google’s cloud, its infrastructure, allows it to operate its software products at scale without the traditionally high costs. For that reason, the company can make its educational products accessible to cash-strapped IT departments, for example.

With infrastructure that allows it to run its software at scale from the cloud, Google’s products become more flexible. That foundation behind it, with Google Apps having found penetration among small businesses, it adapted the suite to address similar productivity and collaboration inefficiencies in education.

Apply that to Google Play and pair it with Google Apps, and you can start to see why EdTech entrepreneurs and investors, when asked what the biggest trends are in education (that no one’s talking about yet), more than a few have said “start paying attention to Google.”

And with the impending arrival of Google Play for Education, if Google can start to get Android tablets into the hands of kids, it looks like they might just be onto something…

Google Developer page here.


YouTube Tiptoes Toward Paywalls With The Launch Of Channel Subscriptions, But The Ads Play On

henson

While it would take you a million lifetimes to watch all the video on YouTube, the company relies on contributions from its amateur and professional partners to keep its content fresh. At the same time, its core business model revolves around providing advertisers with the ability to reach its billion-plus viewers. In turn, video creators rely (or want to rely) on a piece of that ad revenue to continue producing their content. The problem is, of course, that those ads are intrusive, annoying and, at the end of the day, its partners are finding that the revenue from those banners and clips isn’t growing nearly as fast as, say, the number of cat videos on YouTube.

In an effort to provide its partners with an alternative revenue stream, YouTube announced today that it is officially launching a pilot program that enables its video stars to charge subscription fees for access to their channels. Subscriptions will start at $0.99/month, and every channel will be able to offer a 14-day free trial, along with discounted yearly rates.

In its announcement, YouTube cites Sesame Street, which will offer full episodes through its paid channel, and UFC offering fans the ability to watch classic fights as examples. For more, here’s the list of its 53-odd pilot channels.

As of today, users can subscribe to paid channels from their desktops and laptops and watch across devices, but going forward YouTube will look to add the ability to subscribe from any medium/device. On top of that, YouTube will begin a broader roll out of subscriptions in the next few weeks for “qualifying partners,” and from the looks of it, it will be adding a paid channel recommendation feed — just as it does now for free channels.

If you don’t have a YouTube channel, why should you care? Well, YouTube has been telegraphing this for awhile, but it’s really the first (official) sign that YouTube is beginning to tiptoe into the paid video market. Granted, the subscription model isn’t a new idea for YouTube, considering the company just announced in March that it will be launching a music subscription service later this year.

The goal is much the same: Give musicians/artists/creators an opportunity to make some money, while improving the user experience for listeners by potentially removing some of those obnoxious ads that start every video. Of course, in the case of both video and music, it’s much more likely that YouTube is going to stick with both.

Amateur content creators are going to be hesitant about erecting paywalls around their content. Most viewers are going to balk at the idea of buying a subscription to a YouTube channel, and there’s a question of whether or not they’d really be able to convert enough of their viewers to paid subscriptions to make it worth it. In the end, it’s the same issue newspapers and publishers have struggled with for years.

There’s also the fact that every video producer is already offering their content for free, although behind ads. Now you’re going to tell viewers that they have to pay for the same content they’ve been getting for free? Sure, that will work for your superfans, but as is the way with the “freemium” model, if you’re going to charge, the content behind the paywall better be, well, premium. I want to see “Extras,” exclusive content/footage, and so on.

Of course, as Peter Kafka pointed out this week, amateur video producers likely don’t have the resources to produce that exclusive or premium content.

Nonetheless, the company is going to use paid subscriptions in an attempt to attract new partners, new content creator and, we assume, more dollars — although YouTube doesn’t specify whether it will be taking a cut of subscriptions or not. YouTube is clearly aware of the success Hulu, Netflix, Vimeo and other video sites have been having with subscription and on-demand models, and it wants to become more attractive to film and TV networks, studios and producers.

But for now, YouTube can’t make the jump exclusively to subscriptions, because it needs those ad dollars that are keeping the whole thing afloat. It’s a tricky line to walk, no doubt, but YouTube certainly isn’t helping its user experience by setting up the potential to have both a paywall and ads in and around videos for the foreseeable future.

Just speaking for myself personally, I probably most frequently use YouTube for search (and a little discovery), particularly around music. In other words, I’ll have a song or an artist in mind, will do a YouTube search, which inevitably serves a couple or dozens of choices for the same song, artist or even subject. There’s a high likelihood that I have no idea which video I want or is best, which requires some perusing, so having a 10 second ad at the beginning of each video is really disruptive.

Maybe that’s a niche use case, but I suspect not. YouTube ads, while tolerable because we consciously or subconsciously recognize their role in keeping millions of cat videos afloat and online, are frustrating. Sure, Hulu has ads, too, and they aren’t much better. But at least in Hulu’s case, the viewer knows they’re watching a 30-minute or hour-long episode of television online, and regular old offline TV has already conditioned us to expect ads every 5 seconds. Unfortunately. But for a 2-minute clip of questionable quality? Come on.

So keeping ads, while slowly throwing up paywalls is just a bad idea. So the roll out of paid video will end up being incremental and almost just a show of good faith — to keep from ruffling feathers — while the ads just keep proliferating.


Google Scoops Up Neural Networks Startup DNNresearch To Boost Its Voice And Image Search Tech

Google-logo1

Well, Google’s M&A strategy is nothing if not diverse in focus. In November, it acquired package delivery startup Bufferbox. Last month, Google it made its first acquisition of the year, buying eCommerce startup Channel Intelligence. Today, Google dug into the Computer Science department at The University of Toronto to acquire DNNresearch, a young startup founded by professor Geoffrey Hinton and two of his grad students, Alex Krizhevsky and Ilya Sutskever.

Incorporated last year, the startup’s website is conspicuously devoid of any identifying information — just a blank black screen. While the financial terms of the deal were not disclosed, Google was eager to acquire the startup’s research on neural networks — as well as the talent behind it — to help it go beyond traditional search algorithms in its ability to identify pieces of content, images, voice, text and so on. In its announcement today, the University of Toronto said that the team’s research “has profound implications for areas such as speech recognition, computer vision and language understanding.”

Furthermore, Professor Hinton is the founding director of the Gatsby Computational Neuroscience Unit at University College in London, holds a Canada Research Chair in Machine Learning and is the director of the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research-funded program on “Neural Computation and Adaptive Perception.” Also a fellow of The Royal Society, Professor Hinton has become renowned for his work on neural nets and his research into “unsupervised learning procedures for neural networks with rich sensory input.”

In its statement, the University of Toronto said that both Krizhevsky and Sutskever will be moving to Google, while Hinton will “divide his time between his university research and his work at Google,” both in Google’s Toronto offices and at Google headquarters in Mountain View.

For Google, this means getting access, in particular, to the team’s research into the improvement of object recognition, as the company looks to improve the quality of its image search and facial recognition capabilities. The company recently acquired Viewdle, which owns a number of patents on facial recognition, following its acquisition of two similar startups in PittPatt in 2011 and Neven Vision all the way back in 2006.

In addition, Google has been looking to improve its voice recognition, natural language processing and machine learning, integrating that with its knowledge graph to help develop a brave new search engine. Google already has deep image search capabilities on the web, but, going forward, as smartphones proliferate, it will look to improve that experience on mobile.

In a recent paper published by the three founders of DNNresearch, the team found that “despite the attractive qualities of CNNs [convolutional neural networks], and despite the relative efficiency of their local architecture, they have still been prohibitively expensive to apply in large scale to high-resolution images … [However, the results of its research] show that a large, deep convolutional neural network is capable of achieving recordbreaking results on a highly challenging dataset using purely supervised learning.”

Get that?

The acquisition of DNNresearch also follows a $600K gift that Google awarded to Hinton and his research team to support their work in neural nets. Following its do-good thesis, the company pledged to “support ambitious research in computer science and engineering” through its “Focused Research Awards program,” which offer unrestricted, two-to-three-year grants and give recipients access to Google “tools, technologies and expertise.”

So, it looks like Google discovered DNNresearch through its award program and, seeing the implications that the team’s work could have on the fields of speech recognition, language processing and image recognition — all central to its core products — decided that a grant wasn’t enough.

“Geoffrey Hinton’s research is a magnificent example of disruptive innovation with roots in basic research,” University of Toronto President David Naylor said in a statement. “The discoveries of brilliant researchers, guided freely by their expertise, curiosity, and intuition, lead eventually to practical applications no one could have imagined, much less requisitioned.”

More in the University of Toronto’s statement here.

Update: Professor Hinton penned a Google+ post today that offers his take on joining Google officially, in which he says he is betting on “Google’s team to be the epicenter of future breakthroughs.”

Full post below:

Last summer, I spent several months working with Google’s Knowledge team in Mountain View, working with Jeff Dean and an incredible group of scientists and engineers who have a real shot at making spectacular progress in machine learning. Together with two of my recent graduate students, Ilya Sutskever and Alex Krizhevsky (who won the 2012 ImageNet competition), I am betting on Google’s team to be the epicenter of future breakthroughs. That means we’ll soon be joining Google to work with some of the smartest engineering minds to tackle some of the biggest challenges in computer science. I’ll remain part-time at the University of Toronto, where I still have a lot of excellent graduate students, but at Google I will get to see what we can do with very large-scale computation.

Also, for those interested in some context as to the significance of Hinton within the scientific (and technical) communities, check out this Hacker News thread here. Basically, he’s Chuck Norris.


Ev Williams: Medium Wants To Help Build A Sustainable Economic Model For Journalism

2118601809_4fb4b88e70_z1

At the Launch Conference in San Francisco today, Twitter co-founder Ev Williams took the stage to talk to conference founder Jason Calacanis about everything from his experience at Twitter and the rise of Vine to sharing his take on Google and Facebook as well as the latest from Medium, his latest effort to shape the future of digital publishing.

Williams, a serial entrepreneur, has played a key role in helping to shape the way we create and share content on the web, as the co-founder of Pyra Labs, which produced Blogger — and was bought by Google in 2003. In doing so, Williams is often credited with coining the term “blogger” and helping to popularize both the term “blog” and the medium itself. After leaving Google, Williams went on to co-found Odeo and “idea incubator” Obvious, which produced both Twitter and, most recently, Medium (among others).

Through his experience at Obvious, Williams said that he learned two important things about himself. After departing from Twitter, he, Biz Stone and other early Twitter employees revived Obvious, but thereafter he found himself “stuck in a rut,” he told Calacanis. In helping to incubate (and finance) startups like Medium, Branch and Lift, he came to realize that he wanted to focus on building a company and a product — not simply to play the role of investor and advisor.

Seeing a market opportunity, a problem that “mattered” and leveraging his experience at Twitter and Blogger, he took a more active role at Medium, because “having an impact is at the top of my list of criteria” when deciding where and how to invest his time, he said. There was also the fact that Medium is a publishing tool, allowing people to create collections of content around a particular theme and/or subject, while inviting others to add their own contributions to those collections, as Drew wrote in November.

The startup focuses on ideas and concepts he had while at Blogger all the way back in 2000, features that he’d even built for the platform but never got around to implementing, he said. The idea with Medium, and what captured his attention — a problem that he says he feels like he has to solve, an idea most entrepreneurs are familiar with — was the opportunity to create a better Twitter for long-form content, a space that’s currently owned by Tumblr.

In a sense, he says, it’s along the same lines as what Twitter has been able to do with Vine, its popular video sharing app (where Williams sits on the board). It’s “still early, and I can’t take any credit for it, but I like it because it captures the essence of Twitter, for video … it’s becoming one of the first platforms to not just duplicate what came before it — the process for every new medium or platform — but create an experience, feel and interface that is unique to the format.

All of his ventures are either directly or indirectly attempting to address the long-standing problems that still exist in online media today, the Twitter co-founder says, particularly in the fact that, as the Web has succeeded in lowering the cost of content distribution, it’s created a flood of new content and information. The new economic model around publishing today incentivizes and rewards frequency, volume and keeping costs low when it comes to content creation, which, in turn, disincentivizes investment in a particular piece of content — and long-form content. It prioritizes lower quality content and burying higher quality content.

While Twitter and Blogger have both played a role in creating and instituting this new model, the first generation of digital publishing has focused on metrics like unique visitors and page views, which, while it’s a good start, he says, the way we measure the engagement around and value of content needs to evolve.

Medium, Williams says, is focused on understanding whether or not people have read the content, whether they read all the way to the end, whether they engaged, shared and commented — whether they actually got something from that content. “We’ve done speed and quick release in publishing, now let’s focus on the other things,” he told the crowd.

When asked how Medium involves and what his product development process is like, Williams said that, for him, “usage is like oxygen for ideas,” and that he tries to focus on what people are doing on the platform, how they’re interacting with it — not doing data analysis or stressing over user feedback. That way, he says, you are able to get a more organic understanding of what’s important (and of what users care about) in realtime, as the product moves forward. Then you can nudge development in that direction.

As it relates to Medium, Williams said that he wants to create a platform that can give context to the content that people create, eventually leading to a system where the whole becomes more than the sum of its parts. The idea is to allow people to build a cohort of like-minded ideas and, to measure the value of its content, Medium is recording a rough heuristic for “reads,” Williams said in an attempt to discover whether or not people are reading the content, did they stick with it and get all the way through the post, etc.

That being said, Williams continued, he realizes that there’s more friction for Medium as a publishing tool than there is for, say, Twitter. “It’s not like a tweet, it’s not as easy, and we don’t expect the ratio of creators to consumers to be the same for Twitter and Instagram, for example; the point, instead, is not to lower the barrier to get everyone creating, but to get the maximum audience for the really good stuff.”

It would be great to get back to a system in which accuracy matters, and maybe it’s naive to think that quality can (and will) get more attention, he says, but it’s possible to use the network and great design to build a system that creates a better product — and thus creates more attention. “Most of the web is ugly, and the system is broken, it’s terrible for consumption,” he says. “By giving quality more attention and by creating a better system to create better content, we can solve that problem.” And, naturally, better design is part of that.

While the economics of journalism “is a very tough problem,” Williams says, building an economic model that supports journalism “is a worthy goal” and something Medium is
“definitely going to experiment with,” he concluded. The economics are different building a content platform than it is for a publication, any time you build a content platform, you will have commercial usage, and if it’s sizable than there’s money to be made, which is different than the problem The New York Times faces, for example. The idea is to create a bunch of people who are motivated to create content not because they’re getting paid, but because they want to create.

When asked what advice he would give to aspiring entrepreneurs, Williams said that they should focus on building something that they want to exist in the world and to “focus on it entirely.” Something good will come out of it. Of course, as we get older, he continued, that focus becomes much more difficult to maintain, because there are more opportunities — and distractions. “The only way I can manage that is if I say ‘no’ tons of times every single day.” The only way you can really do your best work, he says, if you learn how to say “no,” something that’s easier said than done.

Calacanis also asked Williams what his impressions were of the biggest Silicon Valley tech companies, like Google, Apple and Facebook. Of Google, Williams said that he’s “still a huge fan” and that most people who have worked their maintain a soft spot for the company. “Their values are real,” he continued, “and I love that Larry [Page] is making big bets. I think they’re going to continue to take over the world.”

As to Apple, Williams said that he, strangely enough, doesn’t know the company very well. “It’s funny that Apple is in Silicon Valley, employs tens of thousands of people, yet I don’t seem to know any of them. That’s strange to me.” The big issue for both Google and Apple is that it’s really hard for a company to create real value and be successful in different markets. The thinking is, he says, that Apple has all these smart people, it has all the money, so they should rule the next big thing. But, generally speaking, that’s not the way it happens.

At Google, Williams said, he realized why these big companies — in spite of all their success, all the buzz and giant market caps — create a landscape in which there will always be opportunities for entrepreneurs. In any field a founder chooses, traditionally the conversation has always been one in which VCs will ask, “but what if Google got into this? What would happen to your company then?” While the Google “danger” has always loomed for entrepreneurs, when he got to Google, he realized that it’s hard to innovate and build internally. In fact, most of Google’s most popular products (like YouTube, Android and Maps) were a result of acquisitions.

I realized there’s plenty of room for startups, not because of inefficiency or incompetence at these companies, but they’re just not focused on creating the best value for nimble companies, flexibility and innovation. So that’s the best part of this system, all of these companies eventually fall, or mature, or slow down, he says, and that means that we get to create new things.

You can watch the whole interview here.

[Photo credit: Flickr]


Google Rated The Best Place To Intern In 2013, Followed By Qualcomm, Microsoft, Intel And Cisco

Internship-Photo1

For student jobseekers, in these challenging economic conditions, internships still rank as one of the best ways to prevent yourself from joining the growing ranks of the overeducated and underemployed. In fact, A recent study by the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) found that interning in college not only increases your chance of landing a job, but actually keeping it, too.

The report reveals that 63 percent of paid interns received “at least one job offer upon graduation” in 2012, compared to the 36 percent of grads who had no internship experience. In turn, 75 percent of employees that were hired out of internships were retained after a year, compared to 60 percent for those who didn’t. So, with students now beginning to prepare and apply for summer internship opportunities, online jobs and career community, Glassdoor, has taken a look at the companies that are rated highest among those whose opinion counts the most: Current and former interns.

The report, which the company says is based entirely on intern feedback, highlights the 20 companies that know how to treat their interns right (and are currently hiring), along with those who rank the highest in interview difficulty, and, of course more importantly, in compensation.

For the second year in a row, the highest rated internship program in the country will be found in Mountain View at the Googleplex. This seems fitting given that Google happens to be the setting for The Internship — the appropriately-named buddy movie starring Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson (and Google) that’s due out this summer. Vaughn and Wilson play middle-aged salesman who, after being laid off, find themselves as Google interns. Lots of Google Glass and self-driving car jokes ensue.

The fact that Google now ranks as the best place to intern for the second year in a row might help to explain its (somewhat surprising) “enthusiastic” support of the buddy comedy, along with not only its willingness to participate in the making of the film, but to even do its part in promotion. If you’ve got it, flaunt it, I guess?

But let’s not let Google hog all the limelight. Glassdoor’s rankings of the top 20 internship programs include companies from several industries, seven of which were technology companies. Google took first, improving its ranking from 4.3 (out of a possible 5 points) to 4.6. Qualcomm ranked second among tech companies with a 4.2 rating, followed by Microsoft (4.2), Intel (4.1), Cisco (4.0), IBM (3.9) and Amazon at 3.9.

And which company offers the highest intern pay? For the second year running, Microsoft’s research internship program outranked Google, paying the highest average monthly base pay out all the companies in the report at $7,050/month — up from $6,746 last year. Google’s Software Engineer Internship ranked second at $6,462/month, followed by Microsoft again with its “Software Engineer In Test Internship” at $5,951/month.

Granted this seems to be somewhat at odds with Forbes’ recent report on the top three highest paying tech internships, which saw VMWare grab the top ranking at $6,536/month, followed by Facebook in second at $6,056/month and Microsoft in third at $5,936/month. LinkedIn, Adobe, Google, Amazon, NVIDIA, Yahoo and Apple round out the rest of the top ten. The report is also based on Glassdoor’s findings, so we’ll assume that this is shows the average for all of the company’s internships, rather than a particular program.

You can also check out last year’s overall rankings here.

Google and Amazon were ranked as the toughest interviews, followed my Microsoft and Intel. As to some of the questions interns reported being asked during those interviews?

  • “Who is your hero and why?” — Google Intern Candidate
  • “How many new cars, on average, are bought in the U.S. each year?” — Microsoft Summer Intern Candidate (Seattle, WA)
  • “Design a complex car from the ground up.” — Amazon Software Development Engineer Intern Candidate (Seattle, WA)

And, for those looking for a peek inside the pros and cons of the most coveted tech internships, below you’ll find a few responses from former interns.

Google

Pro: “Google treats interns even better than full time employees. All of the employees all the way up to VP personally spend time with you and take your opinion.” — Google Platforms Project Manager Intern (Mountain View, CA)

Con: “Since Google has grown so much, it’s harder to get things done/it takes a really long to push code or get things out there.” — Google Software Engineering Intern (New York, NY)

Qualcomm

Pro: “Each intern is assigned one mentor and one manager so you get a lot of attention. There are team outings, quizzes and the workplace itself is full of energy. Innovative thinking is encouraged and the work load is well balanced.” — Qualcomm Interim Engineering Intern (Bangalore, India)

Con: “Space was kind of cramped during my internship. Did not get an office or cubicle, instead got a desk that was kind of just in the middle of the hallway (think receptionist’s desk).” — Qualcomm Software Engineer Intern (San Diego, CA)

Microsoft

Pro: “Microsoft has a great environment where you are encouraged to learn as much as you can about your field. Knowledgeable and passionate co-workers who always bail you out. You get to learn a lot from your peers.” — Microsoft Intern (Hyderabad, India)

Con: “Sometimes you can feel like a grain of sand on the beach. As a developer, you don’t have a say in the big picture of the company. If that’s important to you, don’t work here; find a start-up.” — Microsoft Software Development Engineer Intern (Redmond, WA)

Intel

Pro: “Intel has a very organized and constructive internship program. They set you up for success and provide many opportunities for future employment. Excellent pay as well.” — Intel BIOS Technical Intern

Con: “Being stuck in a cube all day is a bit of a drag, though to some extent I think it comes with the job of a programmer. In spite of all of the work they were doing to brighten/open things up while I was there, I don’t really feel like the office spaces are any brighter or more cheerful.” — Intel Undergraduate Technical Intern (Hillsboro, OR)

Cisco

Pro: “As an intern, I was given the same freedom and regular employees, I could work from home, arrive and leave work when it was convenient for me, and I could wear normal street clothes to work.” — Cisco Software Engineering Intern in Research (Triangle Park, NC)

Con: “Because the teams and company are so large it is hard to get to know who you work with. However, this would be less of an issue if I worked full-time and not just a summer internship.” — Cisco Software Engineer Intern (San Jose, CA)

IBM

Pro: “Pay was really high compared to what I’m supposed to get for being so junior. Nice office, really cool building, and really great people. A flexible schedule, yoga lessons, and gym. The company is really large and you feel like you belong.” — IBM Software Engineer Intern (Ottawa, Ontario)

Con: “Slow work effort, it takes too much time to get anything done.” — IBM Intern (Markham, Ontario)

Amazon

Pro: “Very supportive team mates who helped constantly raise the bar by asking the right questions and putting the foot down at the right time.” — Amazon Software Development Engineer Intern (Seattle, WA)

Con: “Less perks such as free food. Could be nice for some employees who are working late.” Amazon Software Engineer Development Intern (Seattle, WA)

Oh, and just for good measure, here’s the trailer for The Internship. Will it be good or a horrible train wreck? You decide.

Excerpt image c/o CollegeCandy


SurveyMonkey CEO Talks About Why His Company Won’t IPO After Raising $794M And Reveals Other Big-Name Investors

money

“We could go public,” SurveyMonkey CEO Dave Goldberg says, “but the cost of going public — of running a public company — outweighs the benefits.” As the founder of LAUNCH Media, which he took public before selling to Yahoo! (where he stayed for six years), Goldberg is familiar with the IPO process and isn’t in any hurry to repeat it.

In 2009, Spectrum Equity and Bain Capital purchased a majority stake in online survey veteran, SurveyMonkey, installing Goldberg as Chief Exec in the deal. Fast forward to today and, as you may have heard by now (courtesy of ATD), the 13-year-old, under-the-radar survey giant has become the recipient of one of the largest private capital investments on record for an Internet company.

The whopping $794 million debt and equity financing round values the company at $1.35 billion, and the amount raised rivals the mega-investments generated by Groupon and Facebook on the road to IPO. Companies typically raise this kind of funding when they’re gearing up for a public offering, but not in this case. Instead, the SurveyMonkey CEO tells us that the company plans to use the massive recapitalization cash out employees and early investors by buying back shares from its employees and stakeholders and, in turn, eliminating most of its existing debt.

It’s a big win for SurveyMonkey’s two primary existing stakeholders, Spectrum Equity and Bain Capital. The former, for example, has reportedly seen more than a 7x return on its $64 million investment.

Not bad for a day’s work. And, hey, if you don’t need cash, why not?

“We don’t need the cash to run; we’re profitable,” the CEO tells us in an interview. “The money isn’t going into the business, it’s going directly to investors and employees. For us, this approach affords many of the same benefits — like the liquidity — of an IPO, without the roadshow, the distractions and the demands of meeting quarterly projections.”

Another reason Goldberg may not be eager to IPO? As if Zynga and Groupon weren’t reason enough, it happens that the SurveyMonkey CEO is also married to Sheryl Sandberg — the same Sheryl Sandberg who became the COO of Facebook in 2008. Sandberg played a key role in turning Zuck’s Social Network Project into a legit, profitable business, and in setting the stage for the “largest Internet IPO in history.” Of course, while Facebook is back on track today, we all know how that IPO went. (It was a disaster, in case you were in a coma.)

Seems reason enough to add another check in the “Reasons Not To Rush An IPO” column, even though SaaS (especially SaaS that’s consumer-facing) is a hot space, and SaaS IPOs have tended to fare better than their consumer web counterparts. Plus, there’s reason to believe the SaaS IPO market will continue to be active — a check in the opposite column.

Nonetheless, SurveyMonkey’s massive round means it can put the public markets on hold, at least for now. Of its $794 million raised, $350 million came in the form of debt financing (from a syndicate led by JPMorgan). Why debt, you ask? Because it allows the company to reduce its share cap, the CEO says, and enable new investors to own a larger proportional stake in the company. Without that debt raise, he continues, SurveyMonkey wouldn’t have been able to pull off the additional $444 million it raised in equity.

While Spectrum will continue to hold a stake in the company after the raise, it reduces the firm’s share of the company, although it remains one of the top shareholders. The same is also true for Bain Capital, as the investment means that the firm is no longer one of the top three shareholders, Goldberg confirms.

Instead, the largest chunk of its equity investment was put up by first-time SurveryMonkey investor, Tiger Global, leading the VC giant to replace Bain as the top stakeholder. Google followed, putting up the second largest share of the investment, with Google’s head of corporate development, David Lawee, joining the company as a board observer. In turn, Tiger Partner Lee Fixel gained a directorship.

The round also saw significant contributions from Goldberg himself, Chamath Palihapitiya’s Social+Capital Partnership, LA-based VC and private equity firm Laurel Crown Partners and, of course, Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg.

While much of this has already trickled out in the press, no one has of yet detailed the involvement of Iconiq Capital in SurveyMonkey’s equity raise — specifically, the handful of notable tech industry CEOs that contributed significant investments via the under-the-radar money management firm. Goldberg confirmed that Yammer Founder and CEO David Sacks participated in the investment, along with Dropbox Founder and CEO Drew Houston, early Facebook employee/CTO and Quora co-founder and CEO Adam D’Angelo, former Yahoo COO, Guitar Hero CEO and current Chief Exec of Chegg, Dan Rosensweig and LinkedIn CEO Jeff Weiner.

Of course, given the significant capital put up by Tiger, Google and an impressive list of investors, the question remains: Why SurveyMonkey? Well, when it comes to affordable, easy-to-use online surveys, SurveyMonkey is the service of record. Its cloud-based, consumer-friendly and freemium SaaS model has created the foundation for a sustainable, high-growth business. Over the last four years (since its deal with Spectrum and Bain), the company’s traction has increased significantly, to the point where it today has 14 million free users, 360K paying customers (who pay $200 to $300/year) and its website averaged 65 million monthly visitors last year.

In addition, the company saw $113 million in revenues last year, which have been growing 30 percent year-over-year, the CEO said. And, according to Fortune, its earnings last year were $61 million at a 54 percent margin.

Given its capitalization, SurveyMonkey manages to remain lean compared to its constituency, employing around 200 people. This has allowed the company to reinvest significantly in its technology, and over the last three years, it has completely rebuilt its entire stack. In turn, it’s been hard at work on APIs and a developer portal and recently debuted an entirely redesigned analytics platform.

The current analytics offerings that accompany its surveys have been sufficient but have been without support for more complex analysis. The new platform aims to fix that, offering a more robust solution for individual and enterprise users.

Going forward, Goldberg sees big growth potential in international markets. While its English language surveys are now in every country in the world, it got a slower start in non-English-speaking countries. While the site now supports 15 languages (and accepts payments in 29 currencies), the CEO says it has a long way to go.

Luckily, that measly little $794 million investment buys SurveyMonkey a lot more time. Down the road, restlessness will grow among its new investors and the company will have to head to the public markets. But until then, quarterly earnings calls are far from Dave Goldberg’s mind.


Google Announces First Project Glass Hackathons In NYC And SF, Will Detail ‘Mirror API’

glass-model-logo-google

Over the last year, Google has slowly been unveiling its plans around Project Glass, the company’s R&D program responsible for attempting to bring wearable computing to the mainstream. Complete with augmented reality and an integrated display, Google’s smart glasses have had many geeks on pins and needles, especially as “Explorer” editions of the glasses have been expected to begin showing up early this year.

Today, Google sent out its first invitations to the developers who signed up for the $1,500 special edition glasses, inviting them to an “early look at Glass” and “two full days of hacking on the upcoming Google Mirror API” in San Francisco and NYC. The invite also includes the first mention of the project’s APIs, which have gone unmentioned to this point.

These hackathons, which Google has dubbed the “Glass Foundry,” are exclusive to developers in the company’s Explorer Program, offering those select engineers the opportunity to get an early shot at building for Project Glass.

According to invitation, the hackathons will introduce developers to Glass (they’ll be given a device on-site) as well as its Mirror API, which “gives you the ability to exchange data and interact with the user over REST.” The developers will then be given free rein to hack away, with Project Glass engineers on hand to help them along the way.

On the second day, the hackathons will culminate with the standard round of demos to be overseen by a handful of “guest judges.” Google doesn’t make it clear what kind of rewards — if any — await the winners. It’s also interesting to see that Google is being so brisk about the invitations, which don’t offer much time for turnaround. The deadline to respond to the invitations is Friday, and the events are scheduled to take place on January 28th and 29th in San Francisco and February 1st and 2nd in NYC.


Imagining The Future: Ray Kurzweil Has “Unlimited Resources” For AI, Language Research At Google

raykurzweil

Last month, famed inventor, entrepreneur and futurist, Ray Kurwzeil, announced that he was joining Google as a director of engineering. In an email to TechCrunch, Kurzweil said at the time that he would be assuming a full-time position in Mountain View, focusing on “new technology development,” as well as machine learning and language processing.

Joining other giants of technology at Google, like VP, Chief Internet Evangelist and “father of the Internet” Vint Cerf, the move was not necessarily an unexpected one, especially as Google co-founders Larry Page and Sergey Brin have long been fascinated by “the singularity” — the theoretical moment in time in which artificial intelligence surpasses the human brain. Beyond being credited as the inventor of the CCD flatbed scanner, the first print-to-speech reading machine, and various other speech recognition technologies and text-to-speech synthesizers, Kurzweil is one of the better known proponents of technological singularity and helped to popularize the concept.

Nonetheless, many have wondered what Kurzweil’s new position would mean for Google and the billions of people its global reach directly or indirectly touches. Would they be uploading Kurzweil’s brain into their datacenters? Become the next Skynet? Fulfill technological prophecies? Speaking at an event at Singularity University today, X Prize Chairman Peter Diamandis and Kurzweil shared in a dialogue that sheds a bit more light on just what Kurz-Google will mean.

Thanks to a post by my friend Kelly Faircloth at BetaBeat and Vivek Wadhwa’s live tweets, we learned that the futurist will be “working on advanced implementations of AI” at Google, where he will apparently have “unlimited resources.”

While it might seem odd that an independent thinker like Kurzweil would join a large corporation, given Google’s reach, enormous computing resources and talent pool (along with the presumed freedom to investigate whether or not Androids dream of electric sheep), there’s plenty of incentive to take this kind of work to Mountain View. Participating directly in innovation — arguably at one of the forefronts — likely has a bit more appeal than writing books and speaking. After all, who needs to know how to read when the robots can do that for us?! It’s likely the same impetus that drew Sebastian Thrun and Peter Norvig to Google, for example.

In conversation with Diamandis, Kurzweil said that he envisions his role at Google to be one in which he helps to create technology that truly understands human language and its real meaning. (At this point, Siri loudly got up and left the room.) Thanks to its many, far-reaching tentacles, Google already has an enormous amount of information about human speech, thought, and beyond; knows where we are, what we’re interested in, who are friends are; and what we’re saying in our emails. “What if Google were actually able to understand us — the user?” to paraphrase a question posed by the futurist.

In part, that’s a frightening concept. (And not really even “in part.”) It’s easy for companies to become wrapped up in defending their market positions, increasing stock price, which often seems to work against them — or at least against their presumed better, innovation-centric selves. So, while Kurzweil’s mission may be an appealing one for us armchair thinkers, the question is whether Google will be able to maintain its “don’t be evil” mantra in the face of innovation, exponential technological growth, knowing anything that happens anywhere — in minutes — and the singularity.

While it may just be food for science fiction fans, Kurzweil said that tech isn’t moving in a linear manner but toward the exponential, and it will “create abundance” as a result. At which point Diamandis chimed in to say that, in fact, “the world’s biggest problems are its biggest market opportunities,” like energy, food and water — or the scarcity thereof. Wishful thinking or not, we need more that believe this.

“We can use technology for creativity or destruction, it’s up to us,” Kurzweil said (via Wadhwa). While it may be hard for people to understand the multivariate implications of technology’s exponential growth curve, things are indeed changing quickly. Asking questions of our phones and getting answers seemed crazy just a few years ago, he said, and today we complain that it isn’t perfect. And therein lies another rub: We expect a lot, and technology has taught us to do so, yet we often give little ourselves.

Moore’s Law will run out of steam this century and will be replaced by new paradigms, Kurzweil told the crowd, as exponential technologies grow at the speed of light in fields like AI, nanotech, robotics and computational neuroscience.

Soon, we will see high school kids contributing to innovation in a meaningful way, he said. While that is an exciting (if not terrifying) notion, “soon” may be a relative term, considering that computer science classes are currently absent in about 95 percent of high schools in the U.S. Though that’s starting to change, too. Albeit slowly.

The most salient point, at least from my perspective, is that we can all benefit from remembering to “think big” — rather than the alternative. Minutiae be damned! To Google’s credit, it has the reputation of supporting and fostering this kind of thinking, and it’s exciting to think of the possibilities that Kurzweil has with access to the levers of Google resources. And, yes, that’s also somewhat terrifying.

As are some of the implications of this speculation from the singularity believer:

Check out Kurzweil’s conversation with TechCrunch’s own Colleen Taylor here.


With New Profiles, ‘Following,’ Search & HD Photos, 360 Is Starting To Look Like The Panoramic Instagram

Screen shot 2012-12-17 at 9.37.11 PM

As great as the allure of its filters may be, Facebook didn’t spend $1 billion on Instagram for its digital photo effects. No, it was because Instagram was mobile-first, growing like a weed, had just launched on Android, and because it had created (with a small team) the first good-looking, mobile-centric social network for photos — location-tagged photos to boot. Launching a major redesign of its panoramic photo-sharing Android app, 360, today, Silicon Valley-based TeliportMe wants to do for the panoramic view what Instagram did for your regular old mobile photos.

Since TeliportMe launched 360 in late 2011, panoramic photos seem to have become the new frontier in the photo-sharing world. With the iPhone 5 and iOS 6, Apple brought support for panoramic photos (and an improved camera) to fanboys and girls worldwide, and, while the functionality has been available to Android users for years, Google got serious about panoramic photography in October with the launch of Photo Sphere, which allows users to stitch their photos together into a 360-degree view and share them to Google+ and Google Maps.

With built-in panoramic capabilities now on iOS and Android, it’s easy to think that TeliportMe’s days are numbered. Then again, a year from now, the vast majority of smartphones will likely have the ability to capture panoramic photos, and that means billions of panoramas being shared every month — every day. What’s more, at launch, Photo Sphere was only available for the Nexus 4.

TeliportMe co-founder Vineet Devaiah says that the coming ubiquity of panoramic images leaves plenty of room for apps like 360, especially if they’re able to add the kind of social networking functionality and “immersive experience” that made Instagram a must-buy for Facebook.

Eventually, the startup wants to be that for both iOS and Android, but it initially it started with the latter, hoping to tackle one of the biggest issues endemic to Android — fragmentation. In other words, Android relies on a long list of device manufacturers, which makes it difficult to build panoramic apps that are, by nature, hardware-centric. So, the founders put in long hours tailoring the app for the specs of each device in attempt to reduce those rendering issues that come from the variety of processing capabilities in each phone.

This has dominated the early development of 360, but thanks to its efforts on the fragmentation front and its improving stitching to make it faster and more OEM-agnostic, 360 is now nearing 1 million users across 150 countries. Of course, it’s got a long way to go if it wants to reach Instagram adoption.

So, since raising a round of seed funding from 500 Startups, Bill Gross and a handful of others, the startup has focused its efforts on building out those “immersive experiences” and today launched a bunch of new features and an overhauled UI that Devaiah hopes will put it on track.

For starters, because one of the biggest limitations to panoramic technology right now is the draining effect it has on your phone’s battery. Most panorama apps let you capture three or four panoramic photos before your battery drops below 50 percent. Even though the technology is improving in more recent generations of smartphones, some Android phones don’t have the processing power to handle much panoramic panning.

To address this, TeliportMe added a “Stitch Later” feature that allows users to postpone the stitching until after they’ve returned home after vacation. This also represents the company’s first venture into in-app purchases, as the Stitch Later feature will be available for unlimited use for a buck.

While 360 already offered the ability to share images on Facebook and Twitter as well as view, comment on and “fav” images captured by friends, the new app adds a key missing piece — following. With its new “follow” button, which functions the same way as it does on Twitter and Instagram, users can now follow their friends and view a chronological album of their friends’ most recent panoramic pics. The can see how many followers they have, how many they’re following, etc.

Along with the follow feature, 360 also adds search functionality, which the TeliportMe founder believes will be the most crucial part of the app going forward. The search feature does what you’d expect, allowing users to peruse through the app’s database of hundreds of thousands of panoramas, searching by location or keyword. While Instagram lets you search by user name and hashtag, it still doesn’t do location search, though this is no doubt something that Facebook will be looking to capitalize on, especially given today’s launch of its “Nearby” feature.

Lastly, 360 users now finally have the ability to see in high-def. TeliportMe’s previous sweeping capture process didn’t include the ability to snap HD pics, but the new update takes care of this problem, allowing photographers to capture the highest resolution their phone can muster.

All in all, it may not be enough for the startup to compete toe-to-toe with the massive resources of Apple and Google, which can slowly out-last and out-feature 360 until its developers run out of cash. But the more it’s able to create a fun, immersive and must-have user experience and get increase its engagement and virality coeffiecient, the liklier TeliportMe is to become an attractive acquisition target for one of the big players. Given what we heard when we last reported on the startup, some have already begun to kick the tires.


Frenemies: Apple And Google Reportedly Join Forces For $500M+ Bid On Kodak’s 1,100 Patents

Titlecard-Best_Frenemies

Sometimes self-interest can make for some unlikely friendships. According to Bloomberg, Apple and Google have finally teamed up to buy Kodak’s portfolio of patents out of bankruptcy for an estimated $500 million. Yes, the two companies are bitter rivals when it comes to the smartphone market, and really every other market — even wearable tech, apparently.

Okay fine, Eric, Apple and Google are more like two gentle nation-states that judiciously balance informed self-interest with an eye for the common good and their conversations resemble the Hegelian Dialectic and not an episode of Jerry Springer. And, to be fair, both Tim Cook and Eric Schmidt have on separate occasions talked about how the current patent system is bad for innovation. And Larry Page and Tim Cook have reportedly been talking about it, too.

Of course, Apple and Google have a strong track record of what is clearly loving litigation, with Google/Motorola most recently attempting to ban the imports of virtually every Apple product into the U.S. Hugs! But Tim Cook, for one, seems eager to put Apple’s litigious history behind them.

That’s part of what led to Apple and Google teaming up to buy Kodak’s patents. It’s also just smart business for both companies. They’ve spent plenty of time and money duking it out in court over patents, and up until now, they’ve also been quietly vying for Kodak’s 1,100 imaging patents. According to Bloomberg, Apple had teamed up with Microsoft and Intellectual Ventures Management, while Google was working with RPX Corp. (patent aggregators) and “Asian makers of Google’s Android phones,” which likely means Samsung.

Finally, rather than allowing Kodak to drive up the price by pitting them against each other, they’re putting on their “frienemies” hats and making the shrewd(er) choice. The two companies, Bloomberg reports, will have four months to produce the joint bid. I’m sure between the two they can find some cash lying around somewhere in 120 days.

It’s also a good move considering the outcome of the somewhat ridiculous Nortel patent war, which resulted in a consortium of tech companies (including Apple) paying $4.5 billion and basically squeezing Google out of the bid. Then Google paid an even heftier sum ($12.4 billion) for Motorola and its 20,000 patents. Whether or not one thinks that was worth it, the evidence seems to show the benefit of finding more productive ways to approach patents going forward. If the companies can follow through with that, it would be great for the entire ecosystem.

What’s not great? The reason Kodak is selling its patents as a result of bankruptcy, which it filed for in January after listing $5.1 billion in assets and $6.75 billion in debt. The company obtained commitments for an $830 million sale last month, “contingent on its sale of the digital imaging patents for at least $500 million.” So Google and Apple are helping to facilitate that exit, which is something Kodak needs badly. Yet, still, it’s an ignominious end for the 132-year-old photography giant.

Image via


9 visitors online now
2 guests, 7 bots, 0 members
Max visitors today: 29 at 07:30 pm EDT
This month: 35 at 05-16-2013 08:04 am EDT
This year: 112 at 04-11-2013 09:43 am EDT
All time: 112 at 04-11-2013 09:43 am EDT
Get Adobe Flash player