We should endeavor to improve the lives of as many people as possible in a lasting and significant way, making the most of our own skills in the process.

Should we aim to affect as many people as possible? My heroes have tended to please themselves first, and to please everybody else by accident. When Steve Wozniak set out to invent the Apple personal computer, he did it for himself, and perhaps to show off for a few nerdy friends at the computer club. Noam Chomsky wrote generally about languages and grammars, and was allegedly annoyed when his research happened to lay the groundwork for major fields of computer science. I doubt many of history’s great advancements happened according to the plan of the geniuses who were responsible for them.

As a self-employed business owner, I want to improve the lives of my customers. And, yes, I would like to have a lot of customers. But Payne’s measure of success is too lofty. Rather than aim incompetently and uncertainly for a massive impact, I focus on a small area that I understand and that I care deeply about. I please a small subset of all people, but I please them greatly. Focusing on what I know and appreciate is the balance that keeps me self-funded, intellectually stimulated, and productive. Who knows, maybe I’ll turn out to be an accidental genius, as well.

Ambition to influence or change the world is, on its own, relatively useless. Pursuit of truth and understanding, on one’s own terms, is the noblest of endeavors. If you’ve found something you can work on all day for weeks, months, or years, don’t let anybody tell you it’s not worth doing.

One of the most important questions any business deals with is how it will be funded. If you’re thinking of starting a business, you should probably decide how you want to be funded early on, so you can orient your business towards being successful in the context of that funding.

Broadly speaking, a business will either be “bootstrapped” or funded by outside investors.

The goal for a bootstrapped business is to come up with your initial funding, be it in the form of cash, free time, raw materials, or some combination, and parlay these resources into a service or product that generates revenue from customers. Once the revenue from customers pays for the founders’ initial investments and sustains the recurring expenses of the business, theoretically including your salary as a founder, the company is profitable and poised to grow. The huge benefit to bootstrapping your own business is that, once the company is profitable, you retain 100% control of the business’s strategy and resources.

Another method of starting a business is to seek outside investment in the form of angel funding or venture capital. You give up some clearly specified percentage of the company’s ownership in return for cash, guidance, and social connections. From here, the goals are basically the same: to become profitable, but at the end of the day you end up with a smaller stake in your own company than you would have if you bootstrapped it yourself.

I think there are good arguments for both approaches, but I am strongly disinclined to seek venture funding for my business. When friends ask for my opinion, I almost always strongly discourage them from seeking it as well. Why? Because venture capital doesn’t speak to our priorities, and is unlikely to build the kinds of companies we want to run.

I was listening to the always-inspiring This Week in Startups podcast when an interview with Tony Conrad led to a perfect synopsis of why venture capital is not right for me. Jason Calacanis and Tony Conrad were discussing the state of venture capital in the technology world, and observed that consumers are spending a ton of money online, but there is a “risk” that the money is being distributed among too many companies. In a nutshell, they said, the online business world was becoming more like “Main Street,” with too many small businesses, and not enough “Walmarts” to pay back the massive returns.

This, Tony Conrad said bluntly, was his “biggest fear.”

Venture capitalists would rather fund a single billion-dollar company than a thousand mom-and-pop million-dollar shops. I can’t say that I fault them for this, but it cuts to the core of where their priorities lie: they gamble on high stakes, massive returns, while shunning the concerns of any business that wants to maintain a mom-and-pop Main Street business ideology. Personally, I prefer the Main Street shopping aesthetic to Walmart, and I know which part of town I want my business in.

If you want to be Walmart, by all means seek venture funding: you’ll need lots of it to stand a chance at succeeding. If, on the other hand, you want to build a company guaranteed to preserve your values, fund it yourself and maintain control. You’ll own something to be truly proud of while helping to scare the crap out of venture capitalists.

Some of Ian’s remarks are inspiring, and may encourage you to blog more even if you already know what blogging is. I particularly like the simplicity of:

Blogging is sharing something you have created online. And then doing it again tomorrow (or next week, or next month, or next year). And again.

If you’re thinking of going to Seattle, be sure to sign up before February 25 to get discount pricing. They also gave me a coupon code to share, “SEABLOG”, that will get you an additional $100 off the discount rate, for a total price of only $395.

I love the idea of highlighting things that others have written, but since I don’t have a convenient repository of these items, and haven’t got time to scour my mind for suitable candidates, I’m sticking to what I know best. Presented here with a brief synopsis:

• Adiós a las Computadoras Dell. On the eve of Apple’s transition to Intel processors, I speculate that the end is nigh for Dell.
• Magical Code. Based on my experience working at very low levels inside Apple, and on my own high level stuff, I dispel the notion that any code is so magical that you can’t understand it.
• Five Things I May or May Not Know. Particularly meaningful for folks who are grappling with the idea that their full-time work is not for them, and are toying with the idea of branching out on their own.
• The Road Less Traveled. The story of my transition from a full-time Apple engineer to a self-bootstrapped software business owner.
• Forget the Shortest Path. Wisdom inspired by lessons in sailing. Sometimes moving directly at your objective is not the most pragmatic way of reaching it.
• It Should Be Free. My reaction to the expectation among some customers that things should be free. I dig into the true cost of “free” things.
• Getting Pretty Lonely. My rant against the GPL open source license.
• Elements of Twitter Style. My fairly recent prescription for getting the most out of Twitter, while annoying the fewest.

Thanks, as always, for your attention to my blog and my writing.

While I don’t think C4 can be replaced, there are other conferences of a similar scale that can help to fill the void. This Fall offers a full calendar of options for folks who are looking for an opportunity to socialize with peers and learn a few new tricks of the trade:

VTM iPhone Developer’s Conference: October 16-17, Philadelphia, PA.
Voices That Matter has been on a run with iPhone-targeted conferences, putting on a show every 6 months or so at different locations around the country. I spoke at the Boston event a year or so ago, and had a great time.

I am attending the Philadelphia event as a speaker alumni guest, and they have also passed along a discount code to share with you: PHBLOGS. If you use this code before September 10th, it combines with early bird pricing for a total savings of $300.

MacTech Conference: November 3-5, Los Angeles, CA.
For all you hardcore Mac and IT nerds who have had enough of the iPhone-only conferences, this is the place for you. This is the inaugural event and seems to have come at least in part as a reaction to Apple’s substantial omission of Mac and IT content from the WWDC event this year.

I’m speaking at this conference and although I won’t say exactly what my topic is, it just might set me up for a world class showdown with my illustrious friend Wil Shipley, who is also scheduled to appear.

360 iDev: November 7-10, Austin, TX.
Hot on the heels of MacTech, 360 iDev is another iPhone-oriented conference that has been skipping around the country. The Austin, TX location is a big draw for me, but I think with so much other activity and the speaking gig just prior in Los Angeles, I will have to sit this one out.

Apple Developer Tech Talks: November-December? Worldwide.
If you haven’t been lucky enough to live near enough and apply quickly enough for these stellar events, you’ve missed out. For the past several years Apple has sent some of its best communicators to put on what amounts to a micro-WWDC: a day of intensive sessions on the latest and greatest Apple technologies.

I attended last year’s New York event and wrote up the experience for TUAW. Assuming Apple puts this tour on again this year, and I’m eligible to attend, I’ll be scampering to sign up. You should, too!

What else is going on in the Apple-sphere this Fall? If I am overlooking something big, please share with us in the comments below. I’ll update the post later with a more “definitive” list of options to choose from.

It may go against the grain a little bit, but I’ll say it: I’m incredibly excited for the future of Mac software. I don’t expect we’ll make software that looks and feels like iOS apps (we shouldn’t), but I do expect we’ll learn from iOS apps how power is the real goal, and that flexibility is just a tool to use exceedingly sparingly, only when it substantially increases power.

I like, no … I LOVE the idea of learning from iOS apps, in order to build superb Mac apps.

As many of you know, I don’t believe the Mac is dead, and it should go without saying I don’t believe iPhone or iPad is dead.

We’re on the brink of an Apple-dominated consumer-electronics era, and we’re in charge of making the software good.

His latest, My Loss, reminds us that even successful entrepreneurs have gone through the wringer more than once, and have made their share of mistakes.

I especially like the “moral” of this latest post:

Say “no” where you used to say “yes”. Say “yes” where you used to say “no”. Do the thing that scares you the most, then get up and go.

This captures the essence of  one of my own motivational mantras: ”Say Yes.”

When someone asks me to speak at a conference, write an article, give a toast at a wedding, attend a conference, or just to have lunch, my gut reaction is to refuse.

Almost every public thing I do that pulls me away from my computer and out of my house, comes from saying yes when I want to say no. I psyche myself up, remember that this life isn’t going to drive itself where I want it to go, and step up to the plate.

Say yes.

At the company’s I/O conference they announced Android 2.2, or “Froyo,” a significant update to their mobile phone OS. The open platform powers many of the iPhone’s most viable competitors, including the Verizon Droid, and Google’s own Nexus One.

Why is this good for the iPhone? Because it’s doomed without a proper competitor, and thus far, it’s been lacking one. What happens to fighters who nobody spars with? Regardless of size, skill, or strength of weapon, they end up flopping about the arena alone. Never defeated, but never victorious.

Apple came out swinging with the launch of iPhone in 2007, and has done an admirable job of shadowboxing: enhancing the device and expanding the platform with iPod touch and iPad. In the absence of serious competition Apple’s legendary paranoia has served some of the same function, but grit and independence of vision will only get you so far.

The details of Android 2.2 are not that interesting to me. What’s important and inspiring is that they are iterating on the product, and not throwing their arms up in defeat. Google lets us know they will not be sitting this round out, and their fighting posture sends a message to Apple, and to the world: the iPhone is assailable.

In order for Apple to benefit from this fight, they need to zero in on the qualities of Android that actually pose a threat. Sam Pullara attempted to give them a hand, by identifying Android 2.2′s lightning-fast Java VM as a potentially deadly blow. I think Sam is overstating the performance overhead in Objective-C. The language’s message-dispatch features have been so finely-tuned by Apple that any criticisms should come pre-loaded with proof of specific performance problems.

Even if we assume that Android’s fast VM does trump Objective-C for speed, is it meaningful to the competition? Duncan Davidson, an excellent photographer who happens to also be a legendary Java expert, says no:

“A faster VM will certainly help things out. But Android’s eventual fate will have little to do with how fast the VM is or how long method dispatches take on the iPhone. Instead, it’ll have to do with harder things like user experience, service plans, interoperability, and excellent applications.”

By most accounts, Android phones still fail to match iPhone when it comes to all those things that Apple does best: simplicity, attractiveness, and refinement of the user experience. But Google knows there is much about Android that pleases: more features, and fewer limitations. They’re using this allure to push the Nexus One on folks who would otherwise be naturally aligned with the iPhone.

The flow of free phones out of Google is measurable by the amount of surprising, casual-switcher chatter I’m seeing on Twitter and in blogs. I got one email from a colleague who announced, “I’m switching to a Nexus One for the week, so please use my Google Voice number to contact me.” If somebody is switching phone platforms, and they know in advance that it’s only a 1-week trial, there’s a good bet they didn’t pay for the phone.

The free-phone strategy is working, prompting fair feedback from folks who nonetheless find plenty of negatives to criticize. Justin Williams demonstrates this with his guarded praise:

“Android is certainly a capable smartphone operating system. In fact, if the iPhone never existed, it’d be pretty great.”

The fact that its greatness hinges on the iPhone not existing is a problem, but it also underscores that iPhone is the primary challenge to Android’s success. Even though Justin stops short of declaring Android a winner over iPhone, he concedes that he’ll probably keep using it until the 4G iPhone is released.

Mike Ash offers similarly candid feedback:

“First full day with the Nexus One. Verdict: substantially uglier, harder to use, but VASTLY more powerful than an iPhone.”

This impression from Mike fits perfectly into the marketing message from Google and its mobile allies. I barely watch any television, and even I know that evidently “Droid Does.” The world is more thuggish than frilly, more impressed by strength than finesse, and this message will work. Android is the gigantic, Dunkin Donuts Coffee Coolatta to Apple’s dainty espresso cup. Still, if you’re only going to offer a couple advantages over the iPhone, power and freedom are not poor choices.

As John Gruber points out, even if Android or another platform takes a dominant position, it doesn’t necessarily spell disaster for the iPhone. Apple’s advantage, as demonstrated by the Mac, is they don’t need to serve the masses to succeed:

“Apple could positively thrive with a long-term mobile market share of, say, 20-25 percent” … “In the phone industry today — all mobile phones, not just smartphones — Nokia sells more than 10 times as many units as Apple, but Apple generates more profit.”

Playing the underdog suits Apple well. I have enjoyed, as a fan and stockholder, their success over the past several years, but it’s changed them. From a company that balanced its own ideals against the demands of developers and competitors, to one that holds a firehose to repel all naysayers.

The risk to Apple is not in losing the masses, but in losing the faithful core. In their unchallenged position, Apple made a lot of right decisions, but they also made mistakes, particularly in the form of political moves that limit what developers can distribute on the platform. These restrictions are done in the name of quality control, but anybody who has browsed the App Store knows that all this autonomy has done little to stem the flow of trashy, embarrassing apps.

What they have done is alienated developers, and ultimately deprived users of software they want to see on the platform. My fear is these botched decisions are hurting Apple, but they aren’t feeling it. Pain is a gift: the signal that prevents a burned finger tip from becoming a body engulfed in flames. Apple is numb from success, and I hope the emerging competition from Google and others will re-sensitize them to the threat of failure.

Google’s Android is the best challenge yet to the political and technical decisions made by Apple for its iPhone and related products. I welcome the challenge, and look forward to Apple’s scrappier, revitalized retaliation.

When the iPad was announced, Apple made it clear that plain iPads with WiFi connectivity would be available first, while the iPad 3G, offering connectivity through GSM mobile networks, would be available some weeks later.

There are many potential reasons for this. Perhaps the 3G hardware was developed on a slightly later schedule than the base model. But it seems more likely that the base model is more or less identical to the 3G’s hardware, with a few conspicuously missing chips (the GPS and the GSM), and perhaps a missing antenna.

The vast majority of functionality for both the 3G and base models could be verified within Apple’s walls. It’s just that question mark next to the 3G connectivity that would have to be verified once and for all out in the real world.

So, how do you do this final sanity testing without drawing attention to your “magical” 10×8 inch tablet, the likes of which nobody has ever seen before? By peppering the world with exactly lookalikes.

Once the iPad shipped, they began to show up in cafés, on subways, in public parks, everywhere! These few weeks have been Apple’s opportunity to send employees out with 3G iPads, completely undetected by curious onlookers. Nobody knows that the 3G iPad on the table at Starbucks is doing anything special. It’s connecting to the internet like all the other iPads in the room, no doubt delighting its user, but also performing valuable last-minute testing for Apple.

If everything goes well in those few weeks, the iPad 3G ships on schedule as promised. But if something really hairy becomes evident, it’s Apple’s chance to prevent the public embarrassment. They stop the factories in China, work out an engineering solution, and adjust the ship date accordingly.