They both tackle the same spot in time, the crossroad. Blow or getting funded / making revenue. You are right, but that is why I think they are bundeled.
If that's your favorite quote, maybe you'll like this post from Alex Turnbull https://www.groovehq.com/blog/turning-down-vc where he laid out his reasons why he said no to a $5 million funding offer.
Around Paul and Ycombinator there are a certain amount of policies that apply to the creation of killer startups and they have been very successful on proving them, being good is one.
A good person inside -and outside acting on behalf- of a company is definitely in the checklist for creating a great startup, I can personally tell. Modern leaders do not fit into the vertical violent commander type and simply loose followers without assembling.
However real life is much more grotesque, dantean and mean than that and bad people sometimes win. In my country there are lots of them and usually respond to a much larger and corrupted ecosystem.
You hit the nail on the head with a huge question, not sure if was on purpose or not but well done.
Your question is much more important than learning code even for a long time. That is a good start. Even super great developers never solve a real problem.
Solving a problem, demonstrating a business model and creating a successful start up are -to my eyes- more and less the same thing and takes years of extraordinary hard work, much more work than people at an office could even imagine.
My advice, watch all these videos are amazingly useful http://startupclass.samaltman.com and try to attach as much as possible to the advices.
"With Apple Watch, developers can create WatchKit apps with actionable notifications and Glances that provide timely information. Starting later next year, developers will be able to create fully native apps for Apple Watch."
Someone from Apple also essentially reconfirmed this earlier today on the WatchKit developer forum.
Edit: here's the source that first tipped me off to this detail hidden away in the press release:
Apple mentioned Force Touch during the unveiling demo, and there is a blurb in their documentation as well:
"Force Touch. A small screen can only accommodate so many controls. That’s why Apple Watch introduces an entirely new interaction model: Force Touch. As well as sensing touch, the Retina display also senses force. Force Touch interactions display the context menu (if any) associated with the current screen. Apps use this menu to display actions relevant to the current content." [1]
I've heard people compare this to a long press, but its subtlety different. Force touch can bring up a context menu faster, because you don't have to wait to determine if a touch is "long" or not
* Section 6-left, a heart drawn on the watch with the name Jamie.
"You don’t even have to use words. The Digital Touch features on Apple Watch give you fun, spontaneous ways to connect with other Apple Watch wearers, wrist to wrist."
* Below, a flower drawn on the watch with the name Eliza.
"Sketch. Use your finger to draw something quickly. Your friend on the other end can watch your drawing animate, then respond with a custom creation for you."
Hopefully is already there or else we might have to wait and see the touch API public for WWDC. Eager to play with it, if anybody has more information please share. Thanks!
Most Advanced Yet Acceptable. When I saw first glass I thought using a prostheses as a dream object was not such a good idea.
Glass jumped stations to reach the head, a point still in premature interaction with a long distance of motion travel of the hands to control it. The head is like in another planet to be reached compared to a watch even a cellphone.
Google went all-in directly to the head when the way to go was wrist, arm, shoulder, neck and then head. In any of the cases the glass experience provided Google with rich information about wearable and its adoption.
I am not sure if Brin will compromise his figure that much in the future with early developed technologies. Even should have been discouraging as leader, but was not his fault since he believed.
I am married with a seven years old beautiful boy.
The hardest part for me during these years of entrepreneurship have been the hassle of not giving enough financial resources to my family and instead putting money blindly into the company and project. In an "early" stage is likely and inevitable waste and mislead of money without exception.
That, in my opinion is the hardest part of all aside from the time spent and the amount of love given mentioned. Personal elections and freedom of choice is cool but when the live style of your family is affected turns cumbersome and contradictory. I can tell a lot about that.
Furthermore if the project fails, most of the time do, that money is gone and gone for the family too. Of course we all know that the experience pays off and the longer term economy will be much better, but at last.
During the journey, your mind plays tricks that opposes completely to a family type of thinking of saving and caring about moving money to and for the family.
Thats life, and part of the freedom of being moved by dreams and vision.
