Profile

Cover photo
Praveen K
Attends Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
524 followers|465,757 views
AboutPostsPhotosVideosReviews

Stream

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
This is what I hate about Apple. They consciously try to hurt competition. They act as if they have 0 confidence in their product. They provide minimum space to competition in their own ecosystem. 
We have just had the latest version of our SeaNav US iOS app rejected by Apple because we support the Pebble Smartwatch and say so in the app description and meta-data (we also state in the review notes that "This application was approved for use with the Pebble MFI Accessory in the Product Plan xxxxxx-yyyy (Pebble Smartwatch)".
2
Praveen K's profile photoRishabh Rastogi's profile photoBrett Legree's profile photo
7 comments
 
+Praveen K in the end, I just wish it had not happened. Apple should be more careful (and more open, but that may be wishful thinking...!)
Add a comment...

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
This is neat! Send directions from chrome to phone
 
Every minute after you clock out of the office counts. Next time you run errands after work, push directions from your computer to your Android phone and have them ready in hand as you head out the door.
200 comments on original post
3
Add a comment...

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
3
Add a comment...

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
We're in the middle of a revolution. Most people will only realize it when it's almost over.
View original post
3
Brett Legree's profile photo
 
You can see it everywhere here, even in rural Canada - solar arrays in unused parts of farms, for instance. Or three weeks ago, when I was travelling in Arizona - many parking lots had sun-tracking solar arrays installed that also provided shade for parked cars - very clever.
Add a comment...

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
Forbes is a joke
 
A Truly Awful Google+ Hatchet Job on Forbes Exposed

As some of you know, I've made it my policy for some time now not to waste time responding to the "Google+ is dead" articles that sprout up from time to time like weeds on a spring lawn. 

But the recent rash have been so bad, so poorly researched and argued, that I had to end my silence.

My next +Marketing Land column (which should publish next week, I think) deals with the main arguments in recent articles by +Larry Kim and +Travis Wright.

But in this post I'm commenting on a new Forbes post by Steve Denning titled "Five Reasons Why Google+ Died." In a response today +Mike Elgan dealt very well with a number of Denning's reasons, including a very bad misunderstanding of a quote by Elgan that Denning doesn't even correctly attribute. You can read Elgan's post at http://goo.gl/FH6DJ5.

I want to address a statistic quoted in the introduction of Denning's article. He quotes +Scott Galloway as stating that Google+ had a "97% decline in engagement rate, year over year." (The actual figure is 98%, as you'll see later, but that's the most inconsequential of Denning's errors.)

That's a pretty stunning claim. I wanted to see the actual study, where its data came from and its methodology. No context was given around the number.

In response to my comment on the Forbes article asking for that information, Denning referred me to a previous article of his, which linked to another article. That article had an embedded video of a talk by Galloway, in which he states the 98% drop in engagement as evidence that Google+ has failed, showing for a few seconds a bar chart with that stat.

But still no link to or citation of, in the article or video, whatever study this data came from. 

It took me almost an hour to track down the original study from which the "98% drop in engagement" comes, but eventually I found it.

It's at https://www.l2inc.com/research/social-platforms-2014. Turns out that L2 is Scott Galloway's own research company. 

The full report is for "members only." I entered my email address to get the download of the non-members version. It turns out to be only an excerpt, and does not contain the methodology or any details on how the data was obtained.

As far as I can discern, L2 looked at the social profiles of about 300 brands. So first off, this is only a study of brand profiles on social media.The study does not look at regular users at all. Which means to use it as a source to proclaim overall engagement is fallacious. 

When I dig down further in the excerpt, I saw that there was a lot more to the story.

Yes, of the 300 some brands they surveyed, Facebook is killing it. But if you look at the rest of the story, Google+ is doing at least as well as, and sometimes better than., the other secondary social networks. 

The ballyhooed "98% drop in engagement rate" (engagements per follower) occurred, according to the study, from July 2013 to July 2014. While that drop is  the worst among the networks surveyed, all of the networks had drops including Facebook, which dropped 13%. 

If you look at the other stats, you get a broader story. 

In the time period studied (again, July 2013 to July 2014), the surveyed brands increased followers on Google+ by 41% (compared to an increase for Facebook of 38%). Moreover, the absolute number of followers for Google+ was the highest of any network (960K, compared to FB's 781K).

Also, brand engagement per post went up 67% on Google+, while only 26% on Facebook. 

So you see, you can prove whatever you want, it just depends on which stat you choose.

And in this case, those numbers only apply to a very small sample of brand pages, not to all users of the networks, as the Forbes writer assumed.

These days I always want to add to these posts that I come neither to praise Google+ nor to bury it (sorry, Shakespeare!). I'm not going after this as a G+ fanboy, but simply because I hate misinformation.
Google needs to rethink its mission statement and delight its customers
87 comments on original post
6
3
Rishabh Rastogi's profile photoDavid Metcalfe's profile photoJazli Aziz's profile photogeorge oloo's profile photo
7 comments
 
+Praveen K yep. I'd prefer telegram over it too but you know the problem about telegram, don't you? No one uses it. 😢
Add a comment...
 
 
If anyone's familiar with the "Success Kid" meme, the boy's name is Justin, and he now needs a kidney transplant. 
Justin is a 39 year old father of one in need of a kidney transplant. Please help us reach our goal so that Justin may get the pre-treatments and transplant he desperately needs. His mother died from this disease, please help us write a different story for Justin and his son, Sam.  Thank you for...
View original post
1
Add a comment...
Have him in circles
524 people
Fahed Qureshi's profile photo
Reynaldo Sagastume's profile photo
Aniruddh K.P.'s profile photo
Sivan Rehan's profile photo
Pratiush Sharma's profile photo
avinash jessi's profile photo
Chetan Salunkhe's profile photo
ASETNIOP POINTESA's profile photo
sAGAR BHAI's profile photo

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
American citizens have a lot of responsibility on their shoulders.
In case you haven't heard, the Patriot Act's Section 215 is set to expire June 1st. That's the provision that National Security Agency uses to justify it
3
Add a comment...
 
India is hot with topic of net neutrality. Now the debate has basically boiled down to whether zero rating violated the principle of net neutrality or whether net neutrality as a principle, is right or wrong.

Now I know no one here would go against net neutrality. Feel free to voice your opinion if you feel otherwise. But I want to know your views on Zero rating.

I personally find it wrong. It's nothing more than a different revenue model. Instead of doing R&D to make their reach more widespread and making their infrastructure cheaper and easier to maintain, they are using this Zero Rating as an excuse to gain more revenue claiming its the right of companies to extract as much profit as it can from its consumers as long as its legal. 
1
Brett Legree's profile photoCharles Gaines's profile photoPraveen K's profile photo
3 comments
 
+Charles Gaines But that's an advantage to players who get free data. It skews the market. Let users decide. This is how TV died in India. Netflix didn't come to our rescue. Today you can imagine new channels fighting on tv that are on the level of start ups. All of them are on YouTube. The good, real, unadulterated stuff. Now they are trying to do the same on internet. Only new players who can afford the entry price will be able to compete.

That artificially raises the entry price. They should try to evolve via R&D, not via changing revenue model. There is nothing wrong with capitalism, everything wrong is with the people running it. Why not use Project loon like innovation to reach remote areas. It's cheap, functional, high speed antenna which can cover a lot more area than traditional tools. That's how one is supposed to earn profit. By gaining real advantage.

Zero rating is shady. Benefits to users is short term. 
Add a comment...

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
Sometimes the way US functions is downright funny. 
US antitrust lawyers reportedly close to filing lawsuit to block deal.
1
Add a comment...
 
Internet.org sucks
 
Why Mark Zuckerberg Is More Concerned About Internet.Org Success Than Net Neutrality ! http://ow.ly/LNOdg
Mark Zuckerberg tried to justify its stand on net neutrality in India recently. Apparently, he forgot to evaluate many aspects, got it wrong
1 comment on original post
3
Praveen K's profile photoRishabh Rastogi's profile photoBrett Legree's profile photoThomas Jr.'s profile photo
11 comments
 
What more to expect from a scumbag who screwed over friends to make a website for friends. Oh the irony! 
Add a comment...

Praveen K

Shared publicly  - 
 
 
+1 "Means well? The shit bird that continually forces top stories on us. The same one who makes people pay for posts if they want to be seen. The one who’s splitting up all the apps in a crapfest. Sure. Means well."
Mark Zuckerberg means well. Or at least the billionaire says he does in a recent blog post about net neutrality and the Facebook-backed nonprofit Internet.org. Long story short, publishers in India are pulling their content from the Internet.org app over apparent net neutrality violations, and well, Zuck’s reaction is pretty much: ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
View original post
2
Add a comment...
People
Have him in circles
524 people
Fahed Qureshi's profile photo
Reynaldo Sagastume's profile photo
Aniruddh K.P.'s profile photo
Sivan Rehan's profile photo
Pratiush Sharma's profile photo
avinash jessi's profile photo
Chetan Salunkhe's profile photo
ASETNIOP POINTESA's profile photo
sAGAR BHAI's profile photo
Education
  • Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
    Mechanical Engineering, 2006 - present
  • Kendriya Vidyalaya
    Science, 2004 - 2006
Links
YouTube
Contributor to
Work
Occupation
Student
Basic Information
Gender
Male
Apps with Google+ Sign-in
Service and staff are excellent. Their attitude towards customers transcends formality to friendliness. Music is too good. LIIT is highly recommended.
Food: Very GoodDecor: ExcellentService: Excellent
Public - 2 years ago
reviewed 2 years ago
1 review
Map
Map
Map