I believe Jon & Co. were working on DailyBooth for some time before YC (see http://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=479352). I'm not sure if/how YC changed their focus/strategy, though.
I'm interested in the opinion of HN readers: PG says 'start from how to make money'; should j-startups be starting from advertising, or paywalls, or something else entirely?
Despite the laughability of some parts of the article I think Calacanis nearly hits on something interesting with regard to Apple, Microsoft, antitrust, and the difference between a computer and a mobile phone.
As the iPhone becomes closer and closer to a full-blown 'computer', at what point do the EU authorities, who sanctioned Microsoft for simply _including_ a browser with its OS, go after Apple for not allowing any browser other than Apple's own? When does the degree of separation become too small to be considered relevant? I'd be surprised if there wasn't an antitrust inquiry into Apple's practices with Mobile Safari in the next couple years if things don't change.
Furthermore, what will users come to expect when the hardware of their phone is functionally indistinguishable from their laptop besides the fact that they can put it in their pocket? Will the software restrictions so readily accepted for mobile devices be accepted on PCs? Of course, the PC and mobile phone industries have evolved from completely different places, but I think there will be a point where users will come to expect the same from their home and mobile computers. Where will the expectation line be drawn?
I don't think the 'simple inclusion' of a browser was what got microsoft to be shot down in the EU. The main reason was their efforts to suppress competing browsers, by software measures in their OS and by backroom dealmaking.
Those were aggravating factors and fairly big ones.
And really, all things considered, giving the users a choice is not such a big penalty. Then there is the fine of course, but I think the height of it was to some extent due to microsofts game playing with the EU courts.
Very true. My only real point is that we should be allowed to demand that both companies not be jerks, and I think we let ourselves down by not expecting it.
I work with Python for a living. Once upon a time I worked with Perl for a living. And I've seen a fair bit of Ruby.
And in my experience, you're simply wrong; aside from toy programs written for golfing or obfuscation contests, there really doesn't seem to be a significant difference, and many of the "concise" features of, say, Perl tend to be frowned on for real-world use because of the impact they have on the ability of others to read, understand and maintain the code.
As for Lisp, well, "concise" Lisp programs tend to remind me of stuff that comes out of the demoscene, where the headline is "look at this awesome demo in 4k!" but it actually relies on hundreds of megabytes' worth of graphics APIs. Lisp seems to be the same way: for every short piece of amazing Lisp code, there seems to be a corresponding huge chunk of functions and macros backing it.
