Email CC: Memos

Michelle is a friend of mine who runs the Houston Angel Network and is also someone whom I consider very smart. We were talking about technology and all of the sudden she warns me, "the minute I tell you this, you'll think about it all the time." So of course I'm not one to back away from a challenge, and I tell her to let me have it. She was right, because I simply can't get this idea out of my head. Imagine getting an invitation or a forward that you want to send out to your email group. Now consider writing an individual note to a single person on that list about the forward you are sending, such as "so-and-so will be there" or "this is exactly what we were talking about last Thursday". The only way to do this practically is to send the mass email and then send separate emails to those few individuals. She really wants a way to send a personalized note within the same email. Well, my initial thought is, "just send the second email", but then I realized how impractical that might be if you had a long list. It is sort of a mail merge problem, inserting your message as a 'field' instead of Dear 'Sir' or 'Madam', but then again, it is still time consuming. I came up a way to handle this, but it requires programming skills, a fundamental change in the way everyone uses email, and an altruistic streak since this is more of a feature (freeware) and really can't be sold as a product (shareware). The "@" sign becomes live and when you click on it in an email address, a dialog box opens up, much like the way you can add a memo to an Excel cell. That means that where ever the email address is, To: CC: or BCC:, it will send your second message with those rules in mind. You write your message in the new pop up window just as you would another email, with attachments and HTML if you like. This new message would be placed at the top of the forwarded message, so that the recipient could reply or forward that on as well, and there should also be a way to "detach" that email from the original. A Detached email would essentially be a new email, and it would follow whatever rules you put on it, and also have a marker for archiving purposes that shows the original. Overall, it makes a lot of sense to me but like most ideas, I'm sure that there are tons of them like this that seem so simple, yet no one has a vested interest/ability to make them happen.

Miss Communication

Like 98% of business computer users, I "live" MS Outlook (version 2002) 24 hours a day and while I have my gripes with it, it's one of those "good enough" apps. It does the basics pretty well, but some of the features seem like bugs, and it forces you to work the way it wants you to, not the other way around. I'm always on the look out (no pun intended) for a replacement but I haven't been able to find one that is better than what I already have. I've loaded 2003 on another machine but have had zero time to play with it. It might be what I'm looking for, but I have a feeling its evolutionary instead of revolutionary. In an email/contact management app, I need the following things: simple Windows interface, management of multiple accounts, searchable by message, replies, or keyword, archivable, and accessible from the net. I have long thought that IM should be integrated into this app, and with the move towards VOIP telephony, I can see the need for an all inclusive app to handle all communications. I've found a discussion that seems like a good start in this direction developed by a (surprise!) Microsoft Interface Architect named Gina Venolia. This is a good overview of a Outlook-Killer application called Grand Central.

It promises to do everthing that I've wanted and more, but I have a feeling that we won't see this in heavy use for another couple of Outlook versions.

It's Been a While

I haven't posted in over a month for 2 reasons: 1) I've been very busy with one of my investment company's first acquisition 2) and for the last week, Blogger wouldn't log me on. As for the first one, the deal hasn't closed and we're under a NDA until it does, but it's very exciting with a motivated seller and a motivated buyer (us) which has certainly helped negotiations. On a personal note, the acquistion target is based in the heart of San Francisco, so as a VC, I feel like I'm playing with the big boys in Palo Alto, even if it's a tiny deal by most top tier VC standards. Speaking of VC's, I going to hear Steve Jurvetson tomorrow at a Rice University luncheon. While I'm not specfically interested in his topic of Nanotech, I'm looking forward to seeing for myself what his presentation is like. And speaking of presentation, a couple of weeks ago, the Greater Houston Partnership and the Houston Technology Center hosted Carly Fiorina. She was an excellent speaker and she certainly has what I call the "it factor" - something special that most successful leaders posses. It's a mix of charm, Charisma, Leadership, Expertise, and Style. And speaking of the "it factor", I met Michaela Pereira who was touring with Cat Schwartz and the crew from Tech TV for a Technology Pavilion a home show here. I came directly from the airport after a couple of nights in Vegas just to see them and I wasn't disappointed. I was there for less than five minutes before I won a book by guessing on a trivia question. I'm not normally one to get star struck, but her presence was captivating and I promised that I'd blog nice things about her. Just last week I spoke with Michael Garfield who played host at the Houston stop for the HP/Microsoft Wireless Mobility Conference. He wheeled in on his Segway, and was predictably very good. As you can see, I'm easily impressed by people who do what they do very well. I was pleased to introduce him to Peter Rojas, a very nice guy because constantly feeding my gadget news habit. I'm sorry I won't be able to make his one year anniversary in NYC this week, but it is sure to be a good time. I guess I'll just have to read about it in his new column in Wired. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to get a broom to sweep up all of these names I dropped.

Remotely Interesting

What do you think a remote control costs a manufacturer? A few dollars, maybe? Having more than one "universal" remote is a joke, to the point it's become a cliche. Here's a radical idea: Don't automatically sell remotes with every new appliance. The manufacturers don't even have to pass the savings along to us consumers - just print your products remote code clearly on the device itself in a consistent space like behind the front panel. Or what about having a button on the inside of that panel that would automatically set up your remote. Also, include a CD with the code to save on our home PC's. Think of it like a hardware driver - basic functions like power, volume, channel up and down, and mute should be hardcoded into every new remote and can be used with every device, regardless of manufacturer. Setup should be the same for all remotes and Infrared or Radio transmission shouldn't matter, nor should the basic layout of keys. In the same way that your device programs your existing remote, the device should talk to other devices - say the cable box to the Tivo. And speaking of Tivo, mine was hamstrung for three weeks due to a broken remote. No universal remotes could handle its special Tivo button. That didn't make any sense to me, plus I simple can't see spending more than US$20 on a single remote control, much less spending hundreds for a Pronto or a Touch Panel. I know that several groups are trying to put this together, like CEDIA but its realy time to change the channel when it comes to doing things wrong just because that's the way we've always done them.

Dave Hornik on VentureBlog talks about the converged handsets he saw at the AlwaysOn Innovation Summit and how the “perfect” phone-PDA combo is little more that a fantasy. I disagree only in that it is very difficult for a large consumer electronics company in Japan or Norway to make the perfect phone/PDA for my personal needs, because I’m a very demanding consumer. It just seems to me that while the do-it-yourself desktop component market has matured (how many of you have built your own machines?) I'm surprised that no major company has been able to do this for the notebook, handheld, or cell phone markets. I know what features I want and could build it given the right parts. I’m not talking about specing out my own pc boards, custom milling my own cases or even depositing components on a sci-fi inkjet printer. A few years ago, Xybernaut, the wearable computer company, put out a press release detailing a patent they were granted on modular components for handheld devices. The idea was that the end user system could mix and match core processing units, screens, and batteries, as well as peripherals like cameras and scanners. I also heard that IBM was doing similar research. I looked at Raj Kumar and his company Khyber a few years ago and saw a great prototype of a handheld cell phone with a separate clamshell screen and keyboard. The handheld contained all of the processing and memory so you could sync or upgrade the other components very easily. This concept of modular components for consumers makes sense to everyone but carriers, possibly because of the perceived customer service nightmares, but the big manufacturers are one that are really at fault. Sony and by extension Sony-Ericcson, of all companies should know better that to stick consumers with new, incompatible proprietary formats like memory stick after their textbook case study of BetaMax. I understand that manufacturers and distributors want to lock in their customers by having proprietary connectors, and there is roughly an 80% markup on car chargers and connection cables, it just smacks of digital oppression in an age of technological enlightenment. I hope that the new case modding movement will trickle down to the most personal of personal electronics – the things we carry in our pockets.