SunPower (SPWR) Presents at Solar Power 2006 Conference

Some nice information from the Cleantech Blog on the recent Solar Power 2006 conference, specifically on advances made by SunPower on increasing the efficiency of photovoltaic (PV) cells:

SunPower is approaching a 23% efficient PV. This helps it take business from typical 17% efficient PV. Dr. Richard Swanson, CEO, SunPower gave the conference good reason to expect continued high growth. He pointed out that in 1975 solar modules cost $100/watt. By 2002, the cost had fallen to $3 per watt. The industry learning curve of 30 years has been consistent – each time that production doubles, cost drops 81%. Dr. Swanson expects $1.40 per watt by 2013 and 65 cents per watt by 2023.

There is a lot of fascination with green technologies in the Valley right now, but solar really looks like the real deal in terms of technology plays.  The economics are very close to fitting consumer pocketbooks (a 2.5kW single home system costs approx. $15,800 after taxes, and can cut your utility bill by 95%), and they will continue to get dramatically better.  Even more exciting, it looks like a lot of competing technologies are going to be released in the next few years to really drive down the cost, and drive up the efficiency of these systems.

I found this news through Seeking Alpha, but clicking through I found a few really neat blogs on the topic:

This is technology news that is worth getting excited about.

Riya tries again as Like.com

I read a lot of news today about Riya trying to reinvent itself as Like.com today. Of all the coverage, Don Dodge’s summary resonated with me the most.

Riya tries again as Like.com

I think Don uses Riya to summarize of the key takeaways I had from my own experience in venture capital:

The lesson for entrepreneurs is don’t have preconceived notions about how your product/service will be used. Test with lots of different customers to discover where they see value. Remember, it is not about the technology…it is about the problem it solves.

Personally, while I find Riya’s technology truly exciting in its potential, this new direction feels a bit too manufactured, a bit too orchestrated and timely. It rings of smart people figuring out strategy behind closed doors, rather than a true customer-driven request or need.

Metadata tagging of blogs and pictures is hot right now, but tagging of video is just getting started. Is it that hard to believe that in a few years, when studios build the digital versions of their properties for distribution (either BD/HD DVD and/or download versions) that they will tag them with the appropriate commercial content? Wouldn’t it be easier for software on the web or on your TV box to just then link to appropriate interesting items (like boots, dresses, cars, other product placements) to a rev-share storefront for the studio? And wouldn’t the owners of that content want to control that linkage – charge for it, since it’s their property (the movie, the show, the shot) that’s driving the demand?

This is hot technology and it’s incredibly generalized, but in many cases we tend to look for the ultimate solution when a very simple, manual process can hit the business need 80/20. So I’m still not sure this is a business vs. a cool demo.

BTW If you haven’t tried it out, go see the Like.com Alpha site.

Blogs I Read: Mac Mojo (The Microsoft Office for Mac Team Blog)

This is a relatively new one for me, but I find the posts pretty interesting from time to time.

This is the team blog from the group responsible for Microsoft Office for the Mac.  Most people don’t realize this, but Microsoft Office actually originated on the Mac, and despite all the conspiracy theories, the business continues to be a fairly large one for Microsoft.

For example, check out this post from yesterday about the size of the Microsoft Office for Mac codebase.  It shocked the hell out of me:

It’s all in the numbers… 

30 million lines of code.  For a suite of applications.  Unbelievable.

For those of you non-technical folks out there, this is a really big number.  I remember when it was revealed that Windows XP was approximately 40 million lines of code, and Sun had a field day pointing out that Solaris was only 7 million at the time.

In software, bigger is rarely better from a complexity or reliability standpoint.  This blog post explains some of the very human reasons why.

I personally have always believed that a complete rewrite is likely necessary from time to time with software applications, usually every 3rd to 4th major version or so.  The problem is, the economics so rarely support re-writing a codebase.  The time you spend rebuilding what already works could be spent on building new features, or fixing old ones.

In a small way, this legacy cost is what helps fuel the ongoing development of new applications, new companies, and new businesses.  It is always easy for the new entrant to “rebuild” what already exists.  This doesn’t make up for the incredible market advantage that the large players have, but it’s an interesting cost advantage that you don’t normally see in most industries.

Anyway, check it out.  Since I am a longtime Office for Mac user, I like seeing ongoing communication from their team to the community.

Blogs I Read: Good Morning Silicon Valley

This is actually a blog I’ve been reading since before there were blogs, and this was just a daily email sent out by John Paczkowski.

I don’t know why, but I just find John’s nose for news interesting, and his wry sense of humor engaging. Take yesterday’s post for example:

Ha ha! You fool! You fell victim to one of the classic blunders! The most famous is never get involved in a land war in Asia, but only slightly less well-known is this: nobody ever benefits from a Microsoft partnership except Microsoft!

I just find “The Princess Bride” reference hilarious, and of course, the coverage of Microsoft timely with the Novell Linux deal.

This is definitely one worth adding to your feed list, especially if you care at all about high tech and/or news from Silicon Valley. This blog is hosted by the SJ Mercury News, but it’s still worth reading.

SpotDJ Beta for iTunes is Live

Actually, it went live about a week ago.

SpotDJ Logo

What happened today, however, is that Scott Kleper, one of the co-founders, added a blog post about SpotDJ and some of the insights from launching the product.

SpotDJ Makes iTunes Better

Not being a big music lover myself, it’s hard for me to completely see the opportunity that Scott sees here. I see that more as a blind spot in my own understanding of the “music lover” rather than any assessment of the business opportunity for SpotDJ. As I posted earlier, I do find the idea of iTunes as a demand-generation platform fascinating – the same way I find Salesforce thinking of their application as a demand-generation platform fascinating.

Being a product guy, however, I did appreciate this tidbit from Scott’s post about a feature that they built for personalization of profiles on SpotDJ:

One of the features that we launched with the beta was the “30 Second Random Interview”. As a registered DJ, you can go to your profile page and answer 3 randomly chosen questions (e.g. “What’s the most embarassing song on your iPod?”). Once you’ve answered all 3, another one shows up. So you can keep answering questions, and the results of your interview are displayed on your public DJ page for other users to see. People love this feature! We have DJ’s who have signed up and answered all 20 or so questions (including, oddly enough, “What kinds of spots do you record?”) without even recording a single spot yet! I think it shows a Web 2.0 truism — you can build web sites that are simply fun to use. We could have made SpotDJ just a download site, but by adding some social features and cool things to explore, we made it a fun site to hang out on.

I think Scott is dead on here, and you can bet that I’ll be bringing this topic up as we discuss new features for the sites that I’m responsible for. There is a really positive insight from the recent growth of Web 2.0 sites around the engagement that people find in sharing personal insights and information with others. I like the simple design that SpotDJ went with on this as well.

So, if you haven’t checked out SpotDJ yet, you should. And if you haven’t thought about how to allow users to better engage with your site and each other on your site, you should.

Apple license Mac OS X to Dell?

“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”
Life of Reason, Reason in Common Sense, Scribner’s, 1905, page 284
George Santayana

“The future success of Apple, Dell and Intel lies with a licensing deal between Steve Jobs’ company and the PC maker according to analyst Gartner,” Andrew Donoghue reports for ZDNet UK.

The ZDNet article is here.  The MacDailyNews coverage is here (the commentary always cracks me up).

I happened to be at Apple Computer in 1996-7, and I remember quite well the launch of Mac OS licensing, and the eventual cancellation by Steve Jobs.

This idea is one that MBAs just love… regardless of the economic reality of the process.

The basic problem with OS licensing for Apple is easy.   Yes, the profit margins are much higher.   But the aggregate margin dollars are much lower.

Example:
Sell 10 copies of Mac OS X to Dell for $50 each.   Even if the margin is 95%, that is a $450 profit.

Sell 10 iMacs for $1000.  A margin of 20% gives you $2000 profit.

End result: Apple would need to expand Mac OS marketshare by 4-5x to make exactly the same profit they do today on the Mac.

It’s not impossible, but the problem is the transition.  What Apple learned during licensing is that when given the option to buy a non-Apple Mac, a lot of existing Mac users took it.

These are Mac users who used to give Apple $200 profit each, and they switched to giving them 1/5 that amount.

That means Apple would have to shrink to a company with less revenue and less profit for several years, in order to hopefully someday capture sufficient marketshare to exclipse their old numbers.  An uncertain bet, given the lockdown that the Windows monopoly has on the desktop.

Unfortunately, I’m not a Gartner subscriber, so I can’t read the original report.  But I feel like I’ve read 100 like it in the past 20 years.

None of them ever explained how Apple would live through the process.   What’s worse, is that Apple actually tried this already.  They gave in to the overwhelming pressure of management consultants everywhere.

Maybe there is an answer now.   Maybe the iPod business gets so large that Apple doesn’t really need the Mac profits anymore.  But I doubt it.

This is a good lesson for all companies that have very profitable businesses that are lower margin.  It’s wonderful to see a promised land with higher margins, but make sure you think through the transition.

In evolutionary biology, they refer to this problem as a “local maximum”.  The problem is that evolution can incrementally push you towards a solution that is better than any other incremental step – but it’s still not the ideal solution overall.

It happens in business as well.

By the way, if you didn’t hear, Apple is delivering numbers that no one would have ever thought possible in 1996.  Q3 earnings here.

Sequoia backs PopSugar for $5M

I’m finding the trend of venture backing for blog networks really fascinating.  Looks like Sequoia has jumped in with $5M for PopSugar out of San Francisco.

Techcrunch has some coverage here.

I’m guessing that the venture backing is a bet that this is a disruptive way to build a new media outfit with a fundamentally lower cost structure, but with all the revenue upside.  Media has always been profitable – witness the longevity and economics of newspapers – so this theory isn’t completely outlandish.

VentureBeat has coverage here.  Interesting deal for Mike Moritz.

Code Monkey Video on YouTube

Found this today on Chad Alderson‘s blog. It’s not worth $1.65 Billion, but it’s definitely worth something.


Jonathan Coulton releases his songs under the Creative Commons license, allowing third parties (like Michael Booth) the ability to create things like these videos with them. These videos themselves are spliced together from World of Warcraft.

Lyrics are available here.

Some key lines:

Code Monkey think maybe manager want to write god damned login page himself
Code Monkey not say it out loud
Code Monkey not crazy, just proud

Code Monkey like Fritos
Code Monkey like Tab and Mountain Dew
Code Monkey very simple man
With big warm fuzzy secret heart:
Code Monkey like you

Very funny, and very cool.

Mark Cuban loves YouTube

From one of the blogs I read, one of the better dialogs about the Mark Cuban comments on YouTube and its copyright liability.

Don Dodge on The Next Big Thing: Mark Cuban loves YouTube

I find the comments to this post almost more interesting than the blog post itself.

To me, the issue of all the major intellectual property legal concepts: copyright, trademark, and patent face considerable challenges from the rapid advance in technology.  It’s only getting murkier.

This is one of the situations that you wish Congress would get involved in to make things clear without years of legal maneuvers, but of course, the last time they tried that we got the DMCA.

Mark has a strong point here about the significant amount of infringing content that YouTube has on its site.  It probably would not be hard to evaluate, based on community rank and views, which “type” of content is driving most of YouTube’s traffic – clean or dirty.  Since any homemade video with a song snippet or video snippet from professional sources is dirty, I’m guessing that this type of analysis would not bode well for an argument that YouTube is primarily for clean content.

At the same time, YouTube is not Napster, and YouTube is not Betamax.  It’s something new, and as usual, it will likely be 2010 before our legal system sorts it out.  In the meantime, something even more innovative and challenging to traditional definitions of intellectual property will come into existence…

Just wait until we get that Star Trek replicator technology going…

Ning on GigaOM & SearchBlog

It looks like Ning has been picked up on some heavyweight blogs today:

Om Malik on Ning

John Battelle on Ning

I’ll save my comments on Ning for another post, another time. I certainly think that Ning shows just how tenuous, from a technology perspective, the Web 2.0 sites hold on users can be.

In any case, I’m going to take this opportunity to share instead one of life’s little pleasures – seeing a friend’s name in print. I first met Gina Bianchini in high school here in the Bay Area, and got to catch up with her a few years ago when she accompanied another Stanford friend to one of my birthday parties.  Growing up in Silicon Valley is fun that way.
I remember hearing the news when Gina took on the opportunity, and its great to see some positive press around Ning. Like all startups, it certainly seems to have evolved considerably from its early days.

Honestly, seeing Gina’s company called out on these major blogs is just a really nice way to start the day. Congratulations to Gina & the Ning team.

Scott Kleper & SpotDJ

A good friend of mine just updated his personal blog for the first time in months recently, and I thought this was as good a time as any to introduce the very cool startup that he’s been working on.

The company is called SpotDJ, and his blog post about it is here.

Scott has been a good friend ever since I met him through the CS 198 Section Leader program at Stanford, where he was one of the first section leaders I hired.  Scott was one of those great student developers who didn’t just take Computer Science classes – he really wrote code.  Shareware, mostly, for the Mac.  Even then, Scott always shipped.

Scott had the misfortune of having an internship at Apple Computer in probably the most depressing time possible – in the Advanced Technology Group, in 1997, right as the entire group was disbanded.  Since then, he’s done some pretty interesting things – working for several companies and even co-authoring a book.

Doing a startup is something that is very easy to talk about in Silicon Valley, but make no mistake about the fortitude it takes to really quit a good paying job and go out on your own.  Scott is doing it right now, and SpotDJ is evolving into something really interesting.

I love the idea that instead of bidding on keywords (Google/Yahoo), you might actually target content/advertising based on a song.  If they can crack some  success measure like cost-per-click (cost per listen?) and some demand measure like click-through (selection? rating?), it’s a very interesting way to target content/advertising in an environment where keywords aren’t the way people navigate.

In any case, check out the company, and kudos to Scott.

Google, Apple & EBM (Everyone But Microsoft)

A lot of press today about Eric Schmidt, CEO of Google and alumnus of Sun & Novell, joining the Board of Directors of Apple Computer.

http://www.appleinsider.com/article.php?id=2003

Everyone is a buzz with implications of what happens if these hot hot hot companies join forces against Microsoft. As you can tell from my sarcasm, as usual, I think the press is sensationalizing a fairly mundane corporate event here, just because putting Google & Apple in the title of articles gets readers these days.

Don Dodge potentially gives this idea more credit than it deserves, but provides a really thorough explanation on why we shouldn’t count our merger chickens before they have hatched.

Of course, if you look closely at any two big internet players these days, you can find synergies:

  • Apple.com has a lot of traffic
  • The Safari browser has 3% marketshare and growing
  • iTunes is the winner in the online distribution of music
  • Google is the winner in market share for natural search
  • Google paid search economics are currently the best available
  • Google Video is a player in the nascent digital video market

However, this announcement has a lot more to do with the fact that Steve & Eric run in the same circles, have a lot of common friends and beliefs, and of course, Google & Apple are both great consumer internet brands. It looks good for Eric & Google to be on the board of Apple, and it looks good for Apple to have Google & Eric on board. Simple.

What is interesting to me, however, is how much better Google is doing handling the mantle of “Leader of the EBM Club” (EBM = Everyone But Microsoft). This has been a dangerous baton to hold, and many formerly strong companies have been destroyed this way. But Google has learned a thing or two about how to proceed here, and it is interesting to watch the next round of the “let’s try to topple Microsoft” game.

It’s different this time, of course. Google & Yahoo both are giving Microsoft fits, so the three-way dynamic is immediately more interesting. Success by new entrants (MySpace, Facebook, YouTube) keep changing the game. The resurrection of Apple continues to astound veterans. And as eBay has shown recently, the other internet powers will weigh in and influence this game. This is a very exciting time to be in the Internet space.

I remember in the late 1990s when Netscape had this mantle, and completely failed to appreciate the responsibility. They largely shunned Apple. Their arrogance got in the way of a deal with AOL (ironic, given the later merger).

There was a time when Netscape had all the market share you could want, but Microsoft clawed their way into a significant minority (25-30%). Then with one deal (the infamous AOL deal to use Internet Explorer), they flipped to majority marketshare and never looked back.

I bring up this story because shunning Apple was not about marketshare, although at the time Macs were still disproportionately strong in Internet market share because they come with networking out of the box, and because Macs were strong in the university & high income demographics (early adopters of the web).

Apple is the Grandpa of Microsoft battles of yesteryear. It is still a thought leader on imagining a world where you DON’T need a DOS/Windows PC. Their audience, though small, are thought leaders – disproportionately represented by the creatives, the journalists, and the executive ranks. They are also cooler than most.

By linking their name with Apple, Google in some ways gains a small, but powerful ally. Like a chapter out of The Lord of the Rings, it makes people think maybe this new champion will succeed against Microsoft where others have failed. The prophecy fulfilled.

The baton is passed.

I’ll post another time about why I think the question of Google vs. Microsoft is likely the wrong one. The Google ethos isn’t about killing Microsoft. In the end, this is much more about future growth opportunities for Microsoft than any type of defeat. But in our market-based economy, growth is power, so it’s worth talking about… another day.

Blogs I Read: Hitchhiker’s Guide to 650

If you haven’t checked out this blog, it’s worth adding to your regular RSS reader:

Hitchhiker’s Guide to 650

It’s written by a friend and former colleague from eBay, Will Hsu. Very witty and insightful, I like the sharp way he looks at key issues surrounding e-commerce, startups, and venture capital. More importantly, I feel like Will captures some of the real psychology of Silicon Valley.

Take his post yesterday on a great Web 2.0 CEO anecdote.

Now, I’m trying not to hold it against Will that he actually does not live in the 650 area code anymore. Still, the blog is a must-read.

I’ll be posting from time to time the blogs that I really recommend, and adding them to my blogroll on the right.