It seems the new buzzword these days is Cloud Computing. Years ago it was called "ASP" then moved to "SaaS" and now it’s "Cloud Computing". While some have talked about Web 3.0, it seems like cloud computing is this year’s hot topic. The most simple definition of cloud computing is that it’s a way to access files and services outside of your own space.

With that said, we received the following video today which I thought was worth sharing:

More CN Coverage:
– Docstoc
– Scribd
– Twitter

Last week I had lunch with a friend and the entire conversation was around Web 2.0 startups. We discussed a variety of different topics but the one that dominated the conversation was how many startups that aim to go mainstream actually have. We named startup after startup and said no to nearly all of them.

With that said, I’d like to experiment with a new feature on CN - that is "CenterNetworks Asks". I will pose a fairly open question to get the discussion going and see where it takes us.

So what Web 2.0 startups that have targeted the mainstream have been successful in going mainstream? I will start with Facebook.

If you need help finding startups to consider, check out Orli’s Go2Web20 startup directory.

Partner Links
– Free Online Budgeting Software

 "Every election cycle, the way the presidential candidates have used the Net has changed and evolved," said Julie Barko Germany, deputy director for The Institute for Politics Democracy & the Internet at George Washington University. "2004 was a huge year for the Internet in campaigns because for the first time people realized you could raise money in a major way online."

When Phil de Vellis, creator of the "Hillary 1984" mashup video, wrote that "the game has changed," he summed up in four words the virtually earth-shaking revolution that is now changing the nature of the political campaign. Candidates in the 2008 presidential election face a landscape unlike any other in political history, and it’s all because of Web 2.0.

"The ‘Hillary 1984′ video demonstrates that the expertise required to make a powerful piece of video has left Madison Ave.," Micah Sifry, executive editor of the Personal Democracy Forum, told TechNewsWorld. "The other important thing about it was that it spread organically because it resonated. This subverts the traditional political paradigm, where only those with lots of money behind them get to speak to mass audiences."

In this new political world, voters are demanding a higher degree of participation in the process, and the technologies are there to make it possible. "In 2004 we saw the first stirrings of lateral connections between voters using Internet tools and platforms, and now we’re seeing the full flowering of that trend," Sifry said. "Voter-generated content and initiatives are going to be the wild card of 2008."

Indeed, it wouldn’t be unreasonable for your average, Internet-weary politician to long for the old days. Back then, political messages were strictly one-way and under careful control. Candidates meticulously crafted their messages and sent them out to a mass audience. The media were expensive and highly polished, with virtually no mechanism for allowing feedback or discussion.

Citizens, meanwhile, were treated as one big, more or less homogenous crowd — they had to be, by virtue of the "mass" nature of mass communications. There was no real reason or means to begin addressing voters on an individual level. Hand-shaking and baby-kissing may have tried to simulate those kinds of personal connections, but when it came right down to it, they were still essentially anonymous and predictable photo opportunities.

"We’ve spent the last decades in broadcast mode, where the focus was on TV, radio and newspaper, and one message was sent out to the entire public," Julie Barko Germany, deputy director for The Institute for Politics Democracy & the Internet at George Washington University, told TechNewsWorld. "But people don’t think that way — they want to have personal connections with the candidates and to speak back on an individual level."

‘The Year of Web 2.0′

"If you look back a little bit, you could say that the 2000 election cycle was the year of the Web site, where candidates first felt the need to have a Web site," said Michael Bassik, vice president of Internet advertising at political consulting firm MSHC Partners, which was the Internet advertising agency of record for John Kerry and the Democratic National Committee in 2004. "Those Web sites were fairly static — more of a brochure.

"2004, on the other hand, was the year of e-mail and online fund-raising, and the Web played more of an integral role in the campaign," Bassik told TechNewsWorld. "If not for the Web, candidates like Kerry and Dean would have had a hard time raising money."

In 2006, video began playing a role in political candidates’ online presence, Bassik said. That trend continues today, and that brings us to 2008, which Bassik calls "the year of social networking and Web 2.0."

A Shining Example

"Every election cycle, the way the presidential candidates have used the Net has changed and evolved," Germany agreed. "2004 was a huge year for the Internet in campaigns because for the first time people realized you could raise money in a major way online. But they also realized something quieter when they noticed the way Dean had started using Web 2.0 to create a community around himself. Even today we still hear people referring back to that campaign."

There’s no doubt Joe Trippi, who managed Dean’s 2004 campaign, made history by demonstrating the ability to use the Internet to amass relatively small contributions — US$100 and under — in unprecedented numbers. So breathtaking were those numbers, in fact, that it soon became clear the technique far outshone the abilities of the traditional political fund-raising machine, with its exclusive, $2,300-a-plate luncheons.

Trippi is also remembered as the man who introduced blogging into politics, and who used social networking site Meetup.com to organize thousands of informal gatherings of Dean supporters. In essence, Trippi used the Internet to organize the biggest grassroots movement to date in presidential politics.

"People learned a lot from the Dean campaign," Germany said. "The Bush campaign watched closely and took away lessons that they used with a Republican spin to get people out to vote. The Edwards campaign, meanwhile, took away its own lessons. After Kerry lost, the Edwards people continued to use some of the community-building tools to keep support for the Edwards campaign going."

Where’s the Money?

Many of today’s candidates are following Dean’s example by using the Internet to raise funds. Part of that is done on their own sites, of course — which it goes without saying they all have. But there are also a few newer options.

At ActBlue.com, for example, visitors can contribute to the campaign of any presidential candidate they want — as long as it’s a Democrat. As before, most online donations tend to come in small increments, and what’s interesting is that the site explicitly embraces transparency in the process. It’s like a PayPal for political donations, and the home page lists for each Democratic candidate how many donors have contributed as well as the total funds raised there so far.

Not only that, but visitors to the site can create their own pages to raise funds among friends and family for the candidate of their choice. ActBlue then tracks how many people have donated and how much has been contributed, as well as transmitting the funds and notifying the candidates in question. In just two years, ActBlue has been used by grassroots supporters to raise more than $21 million.

Little wonder, then, that the Republicans are trying to emulate the Democrats’ fund-raising success: AbcPac.com now offers a similar way to donate to the campaigns of Republican candidates.

Stay tuned for Campaign 2.0: ‘Hillary 1984′ Was Just the Beginning, Part 2

"Websites like doeinneed.com, orangeblazers.com and mulletmen.info are all very limited." They don’t have an approach towards a definite value, a definite point, a common view or opinion, or towards a fixed or equilibrium state.  Their content also doesn’t contain two or more discrete influences or agents acting together to create an effect greater than that predicted by knowing only the separate effects of the individual agents.  "Hunting fans deserve the high velocity, killing power that DeerBeards 30.06 delivers and we aim to give it to them." 

Synergisticologically speaking, DeerBeards 30.06 combines brains and brawn in their latest release. DeerBeards 30.06 has removed basically all social applications from their site and replaced it with the winning combination of Video Games + Movies + News + Deer hunting information. Our viewers want to shoot asteroids, check on the Cubs and brag about their bucks all at the same time.

DB 30.06 offers this and a lot more. 

How exactly is DeerBeards Web 30.06 different?  "We’ve stripped this baby down like Darla at the Vue and are getting back to the basics with DB 30.06."  Sure, we used to have social media and self agitated content, but our neighbors complained about the noise and frankly there are so many other sites that have it….why would we waste the money duplicating stuff, when we could build more games?"

Invited beta users have received the changes with glowing reviews: 

"I love 2 things in this world," wrote local hunter Earl Bilkowski. "Hunting, video games and eating jerky. DeerBeards Web 30.06 delivers all this and more."

The internet is about to be Bagged, Tagged and Dragged so slap on your camo and check us out at www.deerbeards.com

We maximize the productivity and quality of service by giving customer service agents the power to access expertise anywhere within a company or to collaborate with external partners for tailored case resolution. Neocase provides all relevant business units with direct, customized access for solving each customer issue, organizing back-up teams as well as all internal and external departments of a company around a single customer contact.

Neocase can be deployed on-demand, on-premise, or bundled with Microsoft CRM 3.0 sales and marketing modules.

TechAddress:  What makes your company stand apart from your competitors?

Neocase:  While most CRM vendors focus their efforts on the marketing and salesforce automation elements of the CRM equation, Neocase hones in solely on the customer service prong to create both deep domain expertise and a more complete, customer-focused product offering. We implement a unique parent-child collaborative case creation, whereby a case can be easily duplicated by an agent, then administered to internal and external experts to resolve the case quickly. The customer service agent is not always able to solve a case on his own, so Neocase allows for collaboration among the appropriate expertise within a company to solve customer issues.   

We also leverage an innovative channel strategy where channel partners are kept in the sales cycle for our on-demand product, something they have been left out of by many other on-demand vendors. Additionally, the combination of our solutions with Microsoft Dynamics CRM 3.0 delivers the only complete CRM solution available to address the full cycle of sales, marketing and customer service operations.

TechAddress:  What are some of the main features?

Neocase:  The concept of collaboration lies at the foundation of our approach to customer service. Collaboration ensures that customer requests are handled not only in the context of the help desk or customer service department, but also allows smart agents to work in real-time with other departments such as sales, marketing, supply chain, accounting as well as with external partners to utilize their efficiencies and achieve faster case resolution.

Our completely collaborative customer service platform is comprised of seven modules that work well individually and, when used together, function synergistically for faster case resolution. These seven components include a collaborative platform; Self-service Portal which allows for 24/7 online service access by the customer; a Partner Center which enables external partners to contribute to case resolution; Service Level Agreement (SLA) module; Knowledge Base containing extensive online library of past cases and case resolution information; Field Services module to dispatch field services agents through geo-localization; and a Reporting and Dashboards module.

TechAddress:  Who’s your target customer or audience?

Neocase:  Given the flexible implementation structures we offer, our target customer-base includes both SMBs as well as large enterprises. This includes global companies in a variety of industries including high tech, financial services, retail, hospitality and healthcare.

TechAddress:  Any new things in particular that you’re working on right now?

Neocase:  We’re always looking for ways to improve our technology for both the companies who implement Neocase’s solutions and the customers that they in turn service. We’ve recently been elaborating on our collaborative work with Microsoft in anticipation of their pending Titan upgrade later this year. We’re also continuing to expand upon our partner base and join forces with companies whose business practices align with ours, as well as heighten awareness regarding our on-demand offering.

TechAddress:  Where do you see your company heading in the future?

Neocase:  A main focus right now is on building out our worldwide presence in bridging our established product, customer base and success to date in Europe with our relatively new presence and growth in the U.S. We’ve brought together a top U.S. executive team since our launch stateside in early 2006 which should help in penetrating the U.S. market and becoming a truly international entity.

TechAddress:  Any negative feedback or criticism regarding technology and services?

Neocase:  One of the hardest things in the industry we’re in is being able to meet the needs of three different groups: enterprises, their partners and their customers. This creates a diverse base of needs, so in response we strive to take the feedback we receive from these different parties and incorporate it into our offerings.

Many people also believe that CRM is too crowded of a space to successfully break into, but the reality is that there are very few players in the industry that offer a truly comprehensive customer service solution, and that’s the gap in CRM that Neocase is looking to fill.

TechAddress:  So what would you say is the guiding principle behind your company?

Neocase:  From day one we’ve always been completely focused on the customer. While CRM is intended to boast a superior understanding of customer behavior, somehow the customer’s voice often gets drowned out of the equation. Neocase has a history of more than 15 years in the customer service business thanks to Supporter (our parent company), so we are fortunate to have this experience to make our products totally unique in our understanding of our customer’s needs.

TechAddress:  What is the mission of your company and what are you bringing to the market that is innovative?

Neocase:  We aim to help companies make the move from simple case management to complete, personalized customer care. Neocase redefines the customer service function by empowering the agent in a way can serve as a key competitive differentiator and bring the focus back to the customer, resulting in higher quality of service, new revenue opportunities, a substantial reduction in operating costs, and increased customer satisfaction and loyalty. Because the element of "customer" serves as the cornerstone of our products, it also rests at the core of how Neocase aims to treat its own customers.

TechAddress:  Where are you in terms of funding and your lifecycle?

Neocase:  In October 2006 we closed our series B round of funding, supported by Iris Capital. Iris Capital is a pan-European venture and development capital company specializing in media, communications and information technology.

Neocase’s first round of venture funding came from Caisse des Dépôts. Caisse des Dépôts is a state-owned financial institution that performs public-interest missions on behalf of France’s central, regional and local governments. It also manages substantial portfolios of shares in listed companies, private equity investments and real estate assets.

France-based Supporter S.A. provided the initial financial support during the company’s inception. Since 1990, Supporter has remained a major player in the field service and customer service markets.

TechAddress:  If your technology or service is not formally launched yet, when’s the launch date? If you have already launched, when was your launch date?

Neocase:  We formally launched Neocase 10 in the U.S. in May 2006.

By Michael Arrington of TechCrunch.com. Original article can be found here.

Tomorrow we will announce that we have acquired Philip “Pud” Kaplan’s FuckedCompany.com in a stock for assets transaction. The basic details of the transaction are included in a press release that will go out around 9 pm PST tonight, and Pud has also mentioned this on his personal blog. We weren’t going to announce this for another week or so (even though I hinted at it on CrunchNotes), but too many people know about it already and news of it was starting to leak (see Wired and CNET as well). I don’t want to be in a position again where other sites are breaking our news, so we’re announcing officially this weekend.

We’ve been working on this deal for months, it is good that we are finally able to close and announce it.

FuckedCompany first went live in 2000, chronicling failing and troubled companies in its unique and abrasive style after the dot com bust. Within a year it had a massive audience and was getting serious mainstream press attention. As the startup economy became better in 2004, much of the attention the site received went away. But a large and loyal audience remains at the site, coming back day after day for its unique slant on the news. At its peak, FC had 4 million unique monthly visitors.

Since FC focuses on the negative news coming out of startups, and TechCrunch tends to focus on the positive, this combination may seem odd. But the sites are in fact extremely complimentary. For example, the audiences are about equal in size and have very little overlap. So from day one we will double our reach and traffic.

Reasons For The Merger

The market moves in cycles, and its clear that we are at the tail end of the current boom (disregard recent statements I’ve made to the contrary). Thousands of startups launched in the last year and a half, and well over a billion dollars was invested in them. Even in good times, 90% of startups fail. But recent events make me believe that even a 10% success rate might be optimistic going forward. Some recent trends that alarmed us:

• Smart people are saying the end of the current boom is near, and these guys are rarely wrong in their predictions. See, for example, Peter Rip’s recent post “Web 2.0 - Over and Out.” Peter really nailed the analysis in that post - and it’s hard to argue with any of his conclusions.
• The TechCrunch DeadPool, where we track failed startups, is growing exponentially. If the failure rate of startups continues to grow this fast, we will be at a point where failures will begin to outnumber new funded startups. Since 9/10 startups fail, by focusing on the negative we will have much more content for the site.
• While plenty of startups are launching, we aren’t seeing any actual innovation any more. There just isn’t the “wow” factor around new startups like in 2004/2005. That does not bode well for the future - there just isn’t anything left to invent.
• We’ve noticed a significantly higher number of negative comments on TechCrunch relative to past periods. Our readers are unhappy; they want a change in editorial tone.

Also, the current trend in blogging, led by Valleywag and others, is to “go negative first, and ask questions later.” That tabloid-style journalism tends to generate a lot of eyeballs and, subsequently, advertiser dollars. This is something we just can’t compete with. By acquiring FC, we can go more negative faster than anyone else out there, when and if we need to.

With the combination of these two companies, we can now effectively cover a startup from the idea stage, through the hype and funding stage, and then ultimately cover its inevitable bankruptcy and liquidation as well.

What To Expect

Integration will occur slowly. The FuckedCompany site has a notice on it about the announcement and will soon be upgraded to more of a TechCrunch look and feel (white background instead of the previous black and red, and a new logo that matches our font and style. For now, though, we are keeping the sites separate and each will continue to operate normally. Deeper integration will occur over time.

Many of our readers still enjoy reading about new startups, and we won’t stop covering them. But we will likely move new startup coverage, which will be a secondary consideration going forward, to a new blog over time. TechCrunch and FuckedCompany will begin to mirror each other’s content, and at the appropriate time the brands and sites will be merged.

Please Give Us Your Feedback

It’s important that we continue to tweak our business model to ensure that we stay relevant and publish compelling content going forward. That’s the main reason this transaction occurred - we are seeing the end of an era and are acting on what we are seeing.

I know our reasoning won’t satisfy every one of our readers, and I understand that this is a lot of change coming very quickly. I want your feedback to ensure that the merger is done tastefully and properly. Leave your comments below, or send me a private email (my email address is on the About page). I definitely want to hear your opinions.

When TechCrunch first launched in June 2005, there were no blogs dedicated to covering new startups. Today, nearly two years later, there are dozens of excellent blogs doing this, and mainstream media is paying attention as well. Entrepreneurs with new ideas will always have a way to reach potential users and customers. They just won’t be able to do it here any more.

HOW TO: Guard corporate secrets in a Web 2.0 world

There’s no surefire way to completely eliminate the risk of information leakage in a blogging environment. Due diligence requires an approach that involves defense, detection and deterrence:

• Re-evaluate whether you need to update your antivirus and malicious-code protection for Web traffic. Consider a combination approach recommended by Gartner Inc. that involves antivirus software, URL filtering, application controls, Web site reputa