Wednesday, 11 June 2014

Tango Messaging App to Provide Media Content from AOL, Spotify, Vevo

Android Apps Development Company
Tango, the popular mobile messaging app, said Tuesday it has struck deals with media companies including AOL and Vevo to distribute content in a new effort to differentiate itself in the hotly contested mobile messaging sector.
Tango said its 200 million users worldwide will be able to browse new "Channels" for entertainment, news, sports and other categories to discover articles, videos and songs. Content providers so far include music streaming service Spotify, AOL properties including the Huffington Post and Dailymotion, the video repository.
For Tango, the media partnerships are critical for its ambitions to become an online media hub - and a differentiating feature from other messaging services such as WhatsApp, the startup acquired by Facebook Inc in a $19 billion deal this year.
WhatsApp, for instance, has focused exclusively on improving its text-based messaging service, while China's Tencent Holdings service WeChat touts the games it offers.
Tango co-founder Eric Setton said having unique and rich content would provide a unique draw for users. At the same time, Tango's messaging service provided the ideal platform to distribute content for media companies, he argued.
"People realize that less and less time is spent on Web browsers, and all of the rest of the time is in apps," Setton said in an interview. "We have a role to play here, in the distribution of content and the discovery of content because content producers need a way to get into bigger and bigger apps."
Facebook's WhatsApp acquisition in February - the largest in history for a venture-backed company - cast a spotlight squarely on the promise and potential value of mobile messaging apps.
Tokyo-based Line Corp, one of Asia's fastest growing messaging services, is considering an initial public offering this year, according to media reports.
Tango has been watched closely in Silicon Valley circles particularly after it received an investment exceeding $200 million from Alibaba Group Holding Ltd in March, effectively cementing its ties to the Chinese e-commerce giant.
Posted by : Gizmeon

Facebook Is Trying to Be Less Creepy

Facebook apps development company in BangaloreFor the second time in two weeks, Facebook has made a concerted effort to be less creepy.
Exhibit A: The company's decision last week to make the default for new users "friends" instead of public. Exhibit B: On Tuesday, Facebook began downplaying passive updates from third party apps. That means there will be fewer instances of updates such as, "Todd is listening to the Starland Vocal Band on Spotify" clogging up your News Feed.
See also: How to Lock Down Facebook Privacy
As enhancements go, these are pretty minor — really minor, actually. In the first instance, Facebook could have made much bigger strides against creepiness if it made the friends setting the default for everyone and notified them of this. Changing the setting for new users is a tacit acknowledgment that such newbies (who are these people just signing up, anyway?) never noticed their default settings — so Facebook was, in effect, taking advantage of their naiveté.
The passive updates announcement was also a half-measure at best. Notice
Facebook didn't say it was getting rid of such updates; it will merely show fewer of them in your News Feed.
Facebook didn't say it was getting rid of such updates; it will merely show fewer of them in your News Feed.
Still, in the first example, money was at stake. Twitter may be a fly on Facebook's elephantine corpus these days, but insiders say Facebook is genuinely perplexed at Twitter's ability to shore up the market for real-time advertising in a year or so. Facebook has scrambled to catch up with hashtags and trending topics. While the company hasn't released any stats, it's safe to say that most aren't using Facebook to comment on live events the way they do on Twitter. Clearly, Facebook has calculated that it wasn't worth putting Mammon ahead of the user experience.
That's good, because the company hasn't always reached the same conclusion. Remember Beacon? Initiated in 2007, Beacon helpfully let your friends know when you bought something online ("Todd just bought the Twilight trilogy.") After a lawsuit, Facebook shut Beacon down and CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted it was a mistake.
Then, in 2011, the Federal Trade Commission stepped in to force Facebook to get permission from users before it shared information with advertisers. Last year, the FTC revisited the agreement after Facebook initiated a new privacy policy without consulting the agency.
Since Facebook is a free service, it's a fair tradeoff that the company uses some of our information to run ads and pay bills. The problem is that we don't like being reminded of this. That's the problem with the new ads running in the News Feed; when people say they're creeped out by Facebook these days, they're often referring to those "interest-based" ads, which Facebook has run since last October. Such ads are based on your browsing history, so if you were checking out a Cannondale Synapse Carbon 6 bike, you would start seeing ads for that model in your News Feed.
If this creeps you out, though, don't blame Facebook. Twitter is doing the same thing, and Google has done it for years. Neither are evil nor creepy for taking this approach. They're just trying to figure out an ad model that works.
TV advertising followed a similar path. After broadcast TV was introduced nationally in the late 1940s, the industry took years to figure out a successful approach to advertising. Initially, the norm was a full-program sponsorship, which prompted shows like Texaco Star Theater, The Bell Telephone Hour and The Colgate Comedy Hour. It wasn't until later in the decade that Pat Weaver (Sigourney's father) got the idea to offer time slots during programming hours to multiple advertisers.
The result has been a contract with the viewer: We'll let you watch this for free, but you must sacrifice time to ingest some commercial messages. Viewers didn't necessarily like this deal, but their umbrage didn't eclipse the desire for free entertainment — at least until cable, DVRs and Netflix hit the scene.
Facebook is working out something similar, but the primary variable is privacy, not time. Either way, despite the high-flown rhetoric about the wonder of sharing, the nature of your relationship with Facebook is transactional. You may not love where Facebook ends up, but it will be the scientific point at which the company can maximize your value to advertisers without making you flee the site.
Posted by : Gizmeon

Lytro Debuts New File Format, Partners With 500px

Lytro Debuts New File Format, Partners With 500px
Lytro's cameras first entered the spotlight because they enabled users to change the focus of images after they were already shot.
But one obstacle holding the light-field platform back — other than expensive hardware — is that the greater photography ecosystem isn't equipped to handle Lytro's "living pictures," which use a file type not widely supported on the web. But that's about to change.
The company is altering the way it stores images, which will now use a new open-file format that applies the WebGL standard for 3D graphics, according to Recode.
The first third-party platform that will take advantage of Lytro's new format is online-photography community 500px, whose users will be able to view, edit and share Lytro photos. Lytro's images will likely start appearing in other places around the web, too, as the company plans to make its new format available on GitHub, so anyone can take advantage of it.
Lytro's first cameras, which focused on light-field photography, became available in 2012. The company introduced its second-generation camera, the $1,599 Illum, earlier this year.
Lytro has focused on consumer photography up until now. Last year, the company's secured a $40 million round of funding to apply its technology to new categories.
Posted by : Gizmeon

Pinterest Finally Comes to Windows Phone

Pinterest Finally Comes to Windows Phone
Pinterest has finally launched a Windows Phone app. But like many Windows Phone apps, there's a catch: It's only a beta version.
This means that while Windows Phone pinners get all the basics of Pinterest, the app is not nearly as full-featured as its iOS and Android counterparts.
At this point, the app basically provides an easy shortcut to the mobile-web version of Pinterest, with a few native features thrown in, a Pinterest spokesperson told Mashable.
So while users can follow friends, pin new posts and take advantage of most Pinterest.com features, they won't have many of the tools that the iOS and Android apps include, such as a notifications menu and guided search, which rolled out to Pinterest's web users on Wednesday.
Pinterest worked with Microsoft to develop the app. Joe Belfiore, Microsoft's head of Windows Phone, welcomed the service to the platform on Wednesday morning.
Those hoping for a more robust Windows Phone offering can look forward to future updates, which will likely bring more functionality to the app. The team behind Pinterest for Windows Phone said it will continue to make improvements to the app based on user feedback.
Posted by : Gizmeon

How 4 Students Got a Satellite Startup Off the Ground and $500 Million From Google

How 4 Students Got a Satellite Startup Off the Ground and $500 Million From Google
Nearly seven years before Google agreed to buy his company Skybox for $500 million in cash, Dan Berkenstock had his eyes on a more modest goal: winning a $20 million prize in a Google competition.
In late 2007, Google announced the Lunar X Prize, which promised $20 million or more to the first privately funded teams that could land a rover on the moon, take some high-resolution pictures and videos and transmit them back to earth. The lofty goal of the competition was to reignite the space race for a new generation of engineers and entrepreneurs.
Berkenstock, then three years into a PhD engineering program at Stanford, worked to assemble a group of students and investors to beat out the competition. "They spent about a year on it getting everything lined up," Juan Alonso, an associate professor of aeronautics at Stanford who became his academic advisor for a time, recalled to Mashable. "Dan always had a very entrepreneurial spirit to him. I remember him being very entrepreneurial, well put together and not afraid to take risks."
For better and worse, this particular risk didn't pan out so well. The economy collapsed in late 2008 and those who had made tentative offers to fund the Stanford lunar venture backed out.
"I think we learned one of the most important lessons at that point," Berkenstock said during a seminar at Stanford in 2013. "And that's really a rugged determination. Even after the universe told us 'no' by creating the worst financial crisis in nearly 100 years."
The Google competition lit a spark for Berkenstock. He realized there were enough talented peers around him and influential venture capitalists barely a mile away to fuel a project with the potential to disrupt the aerospace industry. Berkenstock teamed up with two of the Stanford students he'd worked with on the Google project — John Fenwick, a veteran of the U.S. Air Force, and Julian Mann, who had previously founded Astronautical Development — and later teamed up with a fourth student, Ching-Yu Hu, who had worked as an analyst at J.P. Morgan. Together they founded Skybox in the very beginning of 2009.
The original plan was to launch small, cheap satellites into orbit that could be used to send information back home. At first, the team focused on using CubeSats, 10cm cubes which were developed at Stanford in 1999 to carry small payloads into orbit at a very low cost. Soon enough, though, the team shifted course to pursue mid-sized satellites that weighed about 200 lbs. and could support better computing and telescopes to capture and transmit high-quality images back to earth.
As one source put it to us, "they basically went from launching a coaster to launching a dorm fridge, but still, that's way smaller than a suburban, which is what the incumbents have in orbit."
Developing the Skybox concept didn't exactly prove to be rocket science, but raising funding for it sure did.
"This is a company that couldn’t get any traction in the venture community," says David Cowan, a partner at Bessemer Venture Partners. "If you ask them about all the challenges they had in deploying their satellites, the number one challenge was fundraising." (Skybox declined to make anyone available for this story. The acquisition is still pending regulatory approval.)
Cowan balked at the chance to participate in a seed funding round for Skybox in 2009, noting that the VC and aerospace industry viewed Skybox as a "joke" and a "naive pipe dream." But he couldn't shake the feeling that Berkenstock was impressive and the startup had the potential to make satellite technology cheaper and more available. In 2010, he finally "built up the nerve" to lead an $18 million funding round in Skybox.
Even then, he says, Skybox "did not have the financing momentum that you see in a lot of hot startups." It was a fight to convince other investors to consider funding the satellite startup. "Nobody took it seriously until November 2013."
That month, almost five years after it was founded, Skybox successfully launched its first satellite (SkySat-1) into orbit. A few days later, it began transmitting images and data. The goal for Skybox was to create a new kind of big data company that could use satellite images to provide detailed information to paying customers on everything from crop yields to consumer behavior. Now, it finally had some data.
Suddenly, everyone came calling.
"Basically we went out to raise a new round of financing and all sorts of suitors came out of the woodwork," says Deepak Kamra, general partner at Canaan Partners and member of Skybox's board. "There was a lot of interest in the company."
Sources we spoke with noted that Skybox had received interest from aerospace and satellite companies, as well as multiple tech companies. One source said the likely shortlist of tech companies interested included Facebook and Amazon, both of which have made investments in drones, as well as Apple, which may have interest in a service like this for maps.
Though Google wasn't the only company to express interest in buying Skybox, it was arguably the most natural fit. Skybox owed its founding on some level to the competition Google had launched years earlier. Google had signed up as an early customer to get data from Skybox. And, deliberately or not, Skybox had set up its manufacturing facility in Mountain View, California, Google's backyard.
"This was a partnership that was simmering for years," Cowan says of Skybox's relationship with Google. "The November launch was a key turning point in how others perceived the company. Anyone who was theoretically interested in becoming an acquirer suddenly became very interested."
For Skybox, the deal offers access to Google's vast talent and financial resources. It means never having to fight for funding again. For Google, the Skybox deal may help improve maps, expand its treasure trove of data and, perhaps most importantly according to some analysts, work to expand Internet access throughout the world.
"I think it's more about what it teaches Google for their Internet satellite ambitions, which is obviously a much bigger and more ambitious project," says Tim Farrar, an analyst with TMF Associates.
Not everyone was excited to see Skybox get acquired.
"This is a bittersweet sale for me," says Cowan from Bessemer. "I’m supportive of the team and I understand the reasons why they want to join up with Google, but just personally, this has been the most exciting [startup] both intellectually and for the profound implications for our species. [That's] something I’m going to miss going forward."
He added: "And I do think that in the long run, Skybox has a very bright future as an independent company."
In their blog post announcing the acquisition, the Skybox team framed it not as selling itself short, but rather as a new challenge: "The time is right to join a company who can challenge us to think even bigger and bolder, and who can support us in accelerating our ambitious vision."
For Berkenstock, in particular, the acquisition also means he finally won that Google prize.
Posted by : Gizmeon

Code in iOS 8 Beta Enables Split-Screen Capabilities

Code in iOS 8 Beta Enables Split-Screen Capabilities

Developer Steven Troughton-Smith has found code inside the first beta version of iOS 8 that allows users to run two apps side-by-side on the same screen. AppleInsider first reported on the information.
Troughton-Smith detailed some of his findings on Twitter. In the iOS 8 SpringBoard, there is code to run two apps side-by-side:
Also, he said that side-by-side apps appear as a single screen in the App Switcher.
Rumors of the split-screen multitasking capability first popped up in early May. But a few days before WWDC, news broke that the feature wasnt ready for prime time and is still a work in progress.
A number of iPad competitors, including the Microsoft Surface line and tablets from Samsung, allow multitasking.
While the code is currently contained in iOS 8, that doesnt mean the feature will ever see the light of day. The code could simply be removed by Apple in a later beta version. But I know a number of iOS device users have their fingers crossed.
Posted by : Gizmeon

Monday, 9 June 2014

Facebook Is Trying to Be Less Creepy

Facebook apps development company in BangaloreFor the second time in two weeks, Facebook has made a concerted effort to be less creepy.
Exhibit A: The company's decision last week to make the default for new users "friends" instead of public. Exhibit B: On Tuesday, Facebook began downplaying passive updates from third party apps. That means there will be fewer instances of updates such as, "Todd is listening to the Starland Vocal Band on Spotify" clogging up your News Feed.
See also: How to Lock Down Facebook Privacy
As enhancements go, these are pretty minor — really minor, actually. In the first instance, Facebook could have made much bigger strides against creepiness if it made the friends setting the default for everyone and notified them of this. Changing the setting for new users is a tacit acknowledgment that such newbies (who are these people just signing up, anyway?) never noticed their default settings — so Facebook was, in effect, taking advantage of their naiveté.
The passive updates announcement was also a half-measure at best. Notice
Facebook didn't say it was getting rid of such updates; it will merely show fewer of them in your News Feed.
Facebook didn't say it was getting rid of such updates; it will merely show fewer of them in your News Feed.
Still, in the first example, money was at stake. Twitter may be a fly on Facebook's elephantine corpus these days, but insiders say Facebook is genuinely perplexed at Twitter's ability to shore up the market for real-time advertising in a year or so. Facebook has scrambled to catch up with hashtags and trending topics. While the company hasn't released any stats, it's safe to say that most aren't using Facebook to comment on live events the way they do on Twitter. Clearly, Facebook has calculated that it wasn't worth putting Mammon ahead of the user experience.
That's good, because the company hasn't always reached the same conclusion. Remember Beacon? Initiated in 2007, Beacon helpfully let your friends know when you bought something online ("Todd just bought the Twilight trilogy.") After a lawsuit, Facebook shut Beacon down and CEO Mark Zuckerberg admitted it was a mistake.
Then, in 2011, the Federal Trade Commission stepped in to force Facebook to get permission from users before it shared information with advertisers. Last year, the FTC revisited the agreement after Facebook initiated a new privacy policy without consulting the agency.
Since Facebook is a free service, it's a fair tradeoff that the company uses some of our information to run ads and pay bills. The problem is that we don't like being reminded of this. That's the problem with the new ads running in the News Feed; when people say they're creeped out by Facebook these days, they're often referring to those "interest-based" ads, which Facebook has run since last October. Such ads are based on your browsing history, so if you were checking out a Cannondale Synapse Carbon 6 bike, you would start seeing ads for that model in your News Feed.
If this creeps you out, though, don't blame Facebook. Twitter is doing the same thing, and Google has done it for years. Neither are evil nor creepy for taking this approach. They're just trying to figure out an ad model that works.
TV advertising followed a similar path. After broadcast TV was introduced nationally in the late 1940s, the industry took years to figure out a successful approach to advertising. Initially, the norm was a full-program sponsorship, which prompted shows like Texaco Star Theater, The Bell Telephone Hour and The Colgate Comedy Hour. It wasn't until later in the decade that Pat Weaver (Sigourney's father) got the idea to offer time slots during programming hours to multiple advertisers.
The result has been a contract with the viewer: We'll let you watch this for free, but you must sacrifice time to ingest some commercial messages. Viewers didn't necessarily like this deal, but their umbrage didn't eclipse the desire for free entertainment — at least until cable, DVRs and Netflix hit the scene.
Facebook is working out something similar, but the primary variable is privacy, not time. Either way, despite the high-flown rhetoric about the wonder of sharing, the nature of your relationship with Facebook is transactional. You may not love where Facebook ends up, but it will be the scientific point at which the company can maximize your value to advertisers without making you flee the site.
Posted by : Gizmeon