Unbelievable. I just signed up last week and was checking out their demos when this email arrives:
Dear Subscriber,
We've been hard at work planning how to best integrate Needlebase's technology with Google's portfolio, which includes structured-data initiatives like Fusion Tables, Google Refine, Public Data Explorer, and Freebase. As we focus on our next steps, needlebase.com will be retired on June 1. To ensure our community of users has time to export any needed data, the service will remain fully operational until then.
We're looking forward to sharing future product developments as soon as we can. On behalf of the Needlebase team, thank you for all your feedback and support.
Justin Boyan
Needlebase lead, Google
I know, Google is dropping projects left and right, and I understand why, but Needlebase is really great and doesn't have an easy replacement. Check it out if you haven't already. Sure, some time from now the technology will be available again, but in the meantime it's going back into Google Stealth Mode. Bummer.
So let's say you're a programmer trying to tell someone why the application you've made, or want to make, or your company made, is great. So you come up with a simple one-line description. But nobody really understands what's so great about it. You try again, and come up with a list of the great features it has. People appreciate that but still don't really see the whole picture. What people really want is a story.
Creating a story really confuses lots of programmers. Either they have bad memories of creative writing or just have no clue how to do it well. But being able to tell someone a story about a product is an incredibly valuable way to communicate. I have been fascinated by story structure but only came up with this particular perspective at Blizzard when I discovered that I would need to make regular and effective demos. So here's a practical perspective to telling a story in a demo or pitch for an app.
Start Simple
Creating a story is really more like finding one. It's a graph search problem. And just like graph problems, you're probably wasting your time if you start depth-first — like by coming up with fictional characters with motivations, family history, etc. This is not only brute force, but the deeper you go the farther away you get from what matters. Don't start like this.
Instead, you want to find a starting point in the most essential use of the app. Make a list and select the most fundamental task the app helps with if it's not totally obvious.
Create a Basic Structure
Here's an easy structure to start with:
The Backstory: A general scenario, with basic insights and status quo
The Need: A relatable need or interest users have
Old and Busted: The "old" way of doing it and why it sucks (optional)
New Hotness: The defining characteristics of your app's approach
Slaying the Dragon: The essential use of the app you decided on already.
The Secret Elixir: Give a peek behind the "magic" so the audience understands better
The New User: How the user's new ability gives them more options or improves their life
This is what we're going to start with. How do we flesh this out?
Explore the story space with lists
You explore the solution space for your story by creating lists of options. Again, resist the temptation to go depth-first in order to fully explore the options. Brainstorm a list for each of these things first and don't restrain wild or humorous ideas because they can often provide flavor later on.
Evaluate Your Options
Now you pick out the stuff from those lists that best fit together. This is a pathfinding task - you're looking for a route through these options that gives the best overall story.You want to try to hit the highest-value pieces of information, interest or distinctiveness while keeping things coherent. If you have a lot of options, try to go for minimalism and just look for a couple of the best little bits to string together.
Expand Your Outline
Now you have an outline. It needs to be expanded into something that you can actually walk through or demo. What's missing is the details of the story. You need to focus on three things - raising questions, sustaining momentum and providing insight. I certainly can't explain it as well as Ira Glass did in his legendary video, so go watch that.
Raising questions is a very basic and powerful thing. Even if you can't come up with any "mysteries", you can take advantage of this. Just pose things as questions. If you have data to present, say "But does it work? It turns out that..." Or start a description of something by saying "Other apps do this..." and raise the question of how you could possibly do things differently.
Sustaining momentum is a matter of not losing your listener and having things flow from one step to another. If you have a demo, you should be constantly directing your user's attention from one thing to another, never opening the parenthesis for long before closing it again and moving on. But in particular, don't stop and describe part of another story (i.e. what happens on another computer). Keep your audience's focus.
And finally, provide some insight - tell people what they're seeing, call out little details, and throw in some commentary. Again, make a list at every stage of what you could note, pick the best things and don't get wrapped up in them for too long.
Iterations and Variations
Once you have the basic story, starting with the app's most essential use, then you can add some extra details. This is basically following a path from one detail to another, touching on key features in a way that ties together narratively.
Start by making a list of things to add at the end, of extra options or features that make your users happy. Then find a way to branch those off of the main demo. For most apps, this will still be a mostly breadth-first path through the app. There will be dependencies, places you can't go to first, and so you need to make those steps have interest as well. You can even mention other possibilities even if you don't take them: something like, "Now that I've uploaded my photos I can email the album to my group, I can tag faces or I can create a slideshow. Let's create a slideshow..."
You can also start over. After you explain the basic use case, you can pull all the way back to look at another aspect. Or you can even introduce smaller stories inside of your main structure. Don't blow the audience's stack frames, though — they're smaller than you think when you're sitting in front of an outline.
Flavor
Now, if you do want to tell a longer story, like a screencast, you could have one or more pieces of storyline conflict, what screenwriters called "reversals." Have a story where your user:
Sees something in the app and remembers there's something else they need to do first
Makes a humorous mistake and the app is clever enough to point it out
Finishes a task, then does something else the app suggests
Sees something that changes their goal entirely and switches to that goal
Anything else which shows that your app is exerting some control of the storyline is a good thing, because it shows that the app is actively affecting the user's experience.
Then you can add some entertaining details. Find some ways to adapt the funny, clever and cool ideas you've had to the presentation. You did keep all your funny ideas, right?
The Goal
Stories are fascinating because they embody knowledge, involve the listener in the search for knowledge, and teach knowledge. You want to be excellent in all three of these areas, but the one that's best is teaching. A great story is a model for knowledge in a way that nothing else is. Use the power of story wisely.
Some Examples
Here are a pair of classic storytelling app demo/pitches from opposing camps. Check out their structure and see what you notice.
So given all the recent hand-wringing over software patents, I think it's instructive to examine the underlying moral presumptions of the patent system which seem most out of whack. Here's the three I see as being problematic.
One, the moral role of inventors is that of originator, the father or mother of their creation. Yet the reality with software patents can be more like being the first to discover a new patentable expression of an old concept. At its worst, it's similar to the old joke about recontextualizing fortune cookie messages – you just add "on the internet" or "on a mobile device" to an existing invention.
Two, that there is something new and beneficial being gifted to the public domain. As it is, patent filers are often like speculators staking a claim on any intellectual terrain they believe to be profitable in the near future.
Finally, and this is the big one, the decision that a patentable invention is novel enough is a decision to be made subjectively based on the state of the art at invention. The issue is just about what someone in the current state-of-the-art mindset would consider obvious; there certainly can't be any after-the-fact objective evidence of obviousness.
The result is that you just have to stray far enough from the state of the art and you can patent nearly anything. That's because if you tackle novel problems, even inventions that anyone would fabricate to solve them still retain the novelty of the problem domain.
It seems like that's what certain firms are setting themselves up to do, to be front-runners. They do seem villainous, but they're basically just taking advantage of a broken system.
It's a fairly critical examination of Intellectual Ventures, which is either:
a new generation of research lab oriented around intellectual-property opportunities which maximizes their value (via a legal arm), or
a world-class patent law firm built to manage a patent portfolio and grow it (via a technology arm).
Depends on your point of view. But the point is that a lot of people are unhappy with the state of the patent system, especially within the software startup industry, and Intellectual Ventures is the most prominent embodiment of where things have gone. They're taking the minimum number of steps to get the patent, which can be quite small indeed now, and letting the rest of the industry worry about actually employing the technology constructively.
In a way, it's the revenge of the futurists. Now, instead of being content to run university research programs, stuffy paper-generating R&D labs, or even write SF or popular articles on the future, they're taking the reins. They're setting up a company, placing bets on future technology, hiring brilliant minds, inking deals and of course, hiring lawyers to file the patents. I have to say this is a business model I envy, especially having seen it from inside.
But given the stifling atmosphere Chris Sacca described for startups, I'd say it's important to re-examine whether the presumptions embodied in our patent system have strayed far from practical reality. I am delighted that some amazing people have found a way to profitably create these intellectual, design and engineering playgrounds, but I wonder at their total cost.
I've worked a little on creating apps dedicated to creating a community. But I learned from the best examples that there is a priority you want to follow when you're dedicating resources to the experience.
So you're creating a social app? Here are your priorities.
Focus First on "Champions" Using the Miracle of the Internet
To get a fanatical user base, you need actual fanatics. They make being a fanatic normal. This is, in fact, the miracle of the internet.
This miracle happens because you have highly engaged people who are also highly visible people. So you start out being interested in something and you end up spending countless hours and effort following it. But that's OK. Because you find yourself within a community where that's normal. And not only that, there will be a "well at least I'm not as bad as them" person! You can point to that person who is "way worse" and at least you're not that bad! The net result? When people create or find these communities their engagement level goes way up. This is what you have to tap to create a social app. Trust me, guilds aren't essential to the profitability of World of Warcraft just because people like to wear matching outfits.
So this flattening of the road of enthusiasm is one thing, but you still need something to propel people. Some people say cheap tricks, others say the ability for users to explore the world of the application, create expressive works and define their identity. I'll let you decide on that one, but figure out something. Not going to help you there right now, sorry.
Then, create a stage where the champions of the app can become its stars. Remember, this is essential for the miracle of the internet to occur, because these are the people who will make everyone else seem normal. They will not necessarily be providing a majority of the content, but they will be like video game music: omnipresent and familiar and eventually beloved as a result. If other people see your champions everywhere they will feel like they could contribute a little more. The great news is that a certain amount of people want to be stars and if their interests align with those of your app, it is the beginning of a beautiful relationship. Don't mess it up. Make them special. Blossom your app's ability as they use it. Have them help to define your app's identity. Reward them for their time invested in every little way imaginable.
Finally, when you start, your champions are going to have to be the founders and employees themselves. Every developer has to at least put in an effort. You might have people who are nominally in customer service but in reality are just nonstop site users. This is great, because again, the first priority has to be your champions, and being a champion is going to make it very clear what is necessary to make them productive. Finding champions is another story, but all you really need to remember is the miracle of the internet. There are already people spending a lot of time on stuff they're enthusiastic about, and all you need to do is to shift some of that time into them using your app.
Then Focus on the On-Ramp for First-Time Users
Okay, smarty, after (and I do mean after) you have a system that's suitable for the highly motivated, you need something friendly and casual for people just stopping by so that they stay long enough to have their interest piqued. It always takes longer than you think for people to understand your site, so dial down the experience for the new user. Then dial it down some more. If they go looking, let them have more, but focus on creating something that people can use without understanding exactly what they're doing. That means holding their hand, inviting them to explore, showing instead of telling, talking in short bursts and using lots of clues to help them.
There will be lots of people who try out your app and figure out it's not for them. This is great because they got to actually try it out. If you have lots of people who can't get through the "try out" phase, you have a real problem because people who would otherwise like it have not been able to figure that out. It's no surprise that every on-ramp process is very hand-holding. Don't have machismo on behalf of your users and say idiotic things like "We don't need instructions, nobody reads those anyway!" That may be true for you the expert or the average user who isn't that interested, but remember the users we're after here - the ones who really are interested but are a little unsure about the app. Putting in instructions that show them the app in a structured way increases their confidence hugely, even if they only need to read them once or twice.
Don't be afraid to over-explain. But always encourage use and exploration in your explanation instead of long sentences. You may have to decide on an example that you don't think shows off everything you wanted to, or seems like you're confining people to a particular use case. But guide them through the simplest example of using your app that lets them understand what the app does, how to use it and what their place is within this app. Then you're ready to move on.
Finally, Encourage Your Casual Users to Become Regulars
This is the last step and I don't really want you to think about it much, just know that it's there and it doesn't come sooner.
This is where you measure, measure, measure. See what actions new users take that gets them "over the hump" and out of the low-engagement zone as soon as possible. Provide some reminders, some incentives and some "here's what you can catch up on" to re-engage them. Honestly, if you're this far though, you've got a great thing going. So if you do, call me and I'll get your advice.
Remember The Miracle of The Internet
So there you go, three priorities. But remember what came first, the amazing power of the miracle of the internet. It's what built Usenet, Wikipedia, Facebook and every other social app. Now go use it to build something new.
Frid.ge is going away. I was never much of a user because I wasn't ever really sold on it. But I'm still disappointed to receive this message in my email tonight.
Apple released a bombshell of an announcement about the future of the iOS App Store. Embedded in it is a sentence that's causing no end of confusion.
Seemingly trying to explain how Apple wants to avoid the scenario where you can purchase a subscription cheaper on the web than from in-app purchasing, they uncorked this curious sentence:
However, Apple does require that if a publisher chooses to sell a digital subscription separately outside of the app, that same subscription offer must be made available, at the same price or less, to customers who wish to subscribe from within the app.
I didn't pay too much attention to this sentence, but popular opinion on Hacker News seems to believe that this will mean that iOS app providers will be required to make in-app purchasing available whenever a subscription is required to use an iOS app. It took me a while to even figure out that this was the perception.
However, coming back to the press release, I think this is undeniably a possibility although by no means clear.
Is Apple going to require Netflix to sell in-app subscriptions? Can they really mean that? What about things that require a lot more sign-up than in-app purchasing would allow for? Will Heroku have to provide in-app purchases so you can monitor your account?
I can't imagine Apple really doing these things, but here's the problem. That is a totally defensible reading of this press release. If customers "wish to subscribe within the app," "that same subscription offer must be made available" to them!
There you go. So get ready to implement in-app purchasing, everyone in the App Store! If they wanted everyone to do that, this could very well be the press release Apple would put out.
I'd like to think I know Apple better to think so, but there is a problem here. Misconceptions and uncertainty are already spreading fast in the public. Apple, I think we need a clarification, and soon.
Yes, this is an LCD laptop toy, the VTech Yo Gabba Gabba Learning Laptop, that is selling for $170 as of today via Amazon. It was a popular toy last year, but it turns out that it was discontinued over the summer and the still-strong demand has raised the price sky-high.
My nearly-3-year-old has one of these that recently ran out of batteries... and refused to turn on after a replacement with fresh AA's. My mother-in-law, thoughtful as she is, looked it up and was of course taken aback. Fortunately, I have made no promises to the boy about getting it working again. But you can bet I'm going the repair route this time.
If you are in the market for one of these, check on eBay where they are (so far) not nearly so expensive. But 'tis the season for toy-based hysteria. And there's still 15 shopping days until Christmas. So look out.
Okay, first let's get this out of the way. Today, the most interesting thing about me is that I'm playing on today's episode of Who Wants to Be a Millionaire. Check your local listings!
Being on the show was a nerve-wracking experience for a lot of people. I did acting in my youth so I was not that nervous in front of the audience. Something else gave me more anxiety than taping the show. It was the contestant questionnaire.
For a little background, my co-founder of LA Life, Don, has a friend who asks everyone he meets, "What's the most interesting thing about you?" Imagine that. It kills me. Almost nobody has an answer. It doesn't just put people on the spot but practically gives them existential terror. It's like Richard Hamming, the insouciant researcher who similarly asked "What's the most important problem in your field and why aren't you working on it?" Talk about getting down to brass tacks.
So when you audition you have to basically answer the same question. There's a list of brief (very brief) blank spaces to fill with the few things that make you unique, interesting or funny. This is of course so that the host has something to talk about when you're on the show. But who walks around with that? Maybe some people do, but few people reflect on it much. I talked about this with a guy I was in line with at the audition, and he was glum that there was nothing that interesting about him. Later, someone else asked him what he did for a living. Well, he runs a gourmet chocolate company out of his kitchen. Oh yeah, that's not interesting at all.
But for me, my thoughts as I was trying to come up with my list of most interesting things was, "Wow, have I wasted my life?!" It seemed like I should have been collecting these things, but I was really struggling to find even a few. At least the most interesting thing about me is not what it was at 6, which was that I made video games out of cardboard (graphics: acceptable for the era; gameplay: lacking). And so I also hope to move my most interesting thing past being on a game show. But hey, for today it's fun. So by now I'm okay with not having a really killer list of interesting things. But it's something I'm on the lookout for now.
Yet the main insight I came away with from listing my most interesting things is this: if you really want there to be a good "most interesting thing about you," you don't have to wait for it to happen. You can go out there and make it happen. I thought hey, I have things I've been thinking about doing, and if I only just started them that would be pretty interesting. Or you could even go out there and find things that express your personality to people. For example, let's just say you won this charity auction for a lifetime of free ice cream at Carvel:
Yes, it's a perfectly legit card that lets you have free ice cream at any Carvel and being sold to benefit the LA Food Bank. Then you have a pretty amazing "most interesting thing" which shows that you have a certain attitude about life (and soft-serve ice cream), for the rest of your life. Or until you lose your wallet.
So today you can work on the next most interesting thing about you. What's it going to be?
, that is selling for $170 as of today via Amazon. It was a popular toy last year, but it turns out that it was discontinued over the summer and the still-strong demand has raised the price sky-high.
