June 19, 2007

New features!

New features have arrived. Now you can tag documents so that you can sort them according to topic. For example, you could tag three documents as “news,” then click on the “news” tag on your home page to quickly find them later.

We’ve also added a search bar to help you quickly find anything in a document. Not just the text, but notes between people, tasks and anything else.

Here’s how a couple of organizations are using Writewith:

Photojojo is a popular blog and newsletter about photography. Its team of writers has been using us to help them write blog posts together since we launched 2 months ago.

The Canadian University Press is a national organization of college newspapers in Canada. Beyond their member’s newsrooms beginning to use us, CUP’s board of directors also uses writewith to work together even though they’re scattered across the continent.

Since we launched in April, we’ve received emails from all types of writers and editors: teachers, students, bloggers, PR folks, novelists and others. Lots of nice words (thanks), lots of interesting ideas for how we can improve — please keep the ideas coming.

June 1, 2007

Incremental improvements

Regular writewith users will notice that we’ve been rolling out a number of incremental improvements to the site since we launched. We launched early — there were a ton of features that we had planned, but we wanted to test them live instead of making a bunch of assumptions ahead of time.

Here’s some of the latest and greatest:

More on your home page: Now you can see which of your stories have been most recently updated, and sort by any column in the table.
picture-1.png

Multi-participant invites. A single form, with a message that you can send that every invitee will get. Users can pull in contacts from their address books in their email applications, using a Plaxo widget that connects to users Outlook, Hotmail, Yahoo!, Gmail and AOL accounts.
picture-7.png

Who’s editing now? Now we tell you, right next to the edit button on a document.
picture-3.png
Public docs: You can make a document public so that anyone on the web can see it and work with you.
picture-10.png

Finally, you can now watch a demo video on our home page. More good things are on the way, so stay tuned!

Email us if you have any thoughts or suggestions: honchos@writewith.com

May 22, 2007

Pick-up in tech blogs.

One truism of web companies is that you need early adopters — typically within the tech community — before you can break into the mainstream. Why? Tech folks are more attuned to new tech than most people, and they’ll tell everyone else about the stuff that’s good. This is the story of Yahoo, Google and countless others.

However, we’ve been thinking that only a fraction of our target users (people who write together a lot) are in this early-adopter category, so we’ve been looking to break the web mold and form a core among regular folks. Still, we’re seeing good things with the techies.

For example, last week we had a couple of tech bloggers write about us because they use us:

  • TechTear, a Spanish-language tech blog based in Madrid, interviewed me about our past, present and future. The interviewer, David Alayón, thought we were a useful application (he’s a tech guy who writes for more than one blog — so a nice affirmation of our blog functionality).
  • Onlamp, an O’Reilly blog that covers open source web platforms, wrote about how a group of developers in San Francisco and Sao Paulo use us to keep track of documents. The writer pointed out some of what makes writewith unique: “for each document you can establish a workflow, there is an easy-to-use history and notes section and there is a nice desktop-like interface for editing the current revision.”

The latter post also mentioned how the group uses writewith together with a wiki to manage the group’s documents. Note: we have some interesting things in the works along those lines. Watch this blog for more news, and don’t forget to email us with your thoughts: honchos@writewith.com

May 4, 2007

Web power

Since we launched, we’ve seen people using writewith in ways we hadn’t assumed. Here are some samples of what we’ve been hearing from people:

  • A classroom peer-reviewing students’ assignments
  • Conference organizers planning out a schedule of events together
  • A group of friends brainstorming ideas for a club that they’re forming
  • A live web broadcaster collaboratively taking notes with his audience
  • And of course, members of a group blog working on drafts of their posts 

When we switched from defining our product as an “online newsroom” that only a few select people could get access to, we were starting an experiment… are the tools that are useful for writers and editors also useful for all sorts of other writing? Would we be able to use the web to find this out, via people blogging about us and recommending us to each other? The answers: yes and yes.

Making writewith publicly available has given us a better understanding of what we’re doing wrong and what we’re doing right. This mass of input from various sources helps to shape our decisions about which features to work on — this is how we avoid building a product full of features that nobody uses!

All part of our plan for making writing together work better.

Please shoot us an email if you have more ideas for improvements: honchos@writewith.com

April 21, 2007

Our plan for fixing office software.

The concept of putting office software online is not new — being more connected would clearly help organizations become more efficient. But the general population is just starting to use the web for work. Approximately 450 million people around the world are still using Microsoft Office (Word, Excel, Powerpoint, etc.).

Software companies of all sizes, and from all sorts of backgrounds, are aiming at the desktop office — especially, it seems, because the online land grab seems to have already taken place in social networking, social news, photo sharing, etc….

These fields are green but there are fences in the way that weren’t there for, say, Digg. Here’s one: bloated enterprise software vendors have their products and services (and sales teams) firmly entrenched within companies (that’s how they get away with charging so much).

We think that one of the big problems with office software and enterprise software in general is that features are designed based on a feature list compiled from many different people — the original vision of the product becomes muddled by feature-creep, and it ends up hard to use.

We don’t care (too much) about the bajillion features in Microsoft Word — we’re laser-focused on how people actually write together. Based on our experiences building online newsrooms for college newspapers, we decided to launch with the minimum number of features necessary.

And that’s how we’re climbing over the fences.

April 18, 2007

Met the press.

We launched less than a week ago… so far, so good.

We’ve been in the press a lot already, from the tech blogs to international and education-focused bloggers. Here are some highlights:

Techcrunch
, a leading Silicon Valley tech blog, reviewed us, calling us a tool for collaborative blogging:
“Current blogging software is rather kludgy when it comes to working with other writers on posts. To collaborate on a document in WordPress, you have to share a draft link with a friend and also create an account for that person. And even then, you only have one version of the document, causing old versions to be lost by new revisions. Writewith may eventually change that for blogs and any other online publishing platform.”

Business 2.0 Beta also reviewed us:
“Writewith, by contrast [to Google Docs], keeps a list of people you’ve worked with on documents in the past, so as you generate documents, it’s easy to involve the same group in your workflow. It also allows you to assign tasks and track when they’re done, making it easier to push, say, a news story through an editing process.”

We got blogged around the world — one French blogger even claimed to have been “seduced by the simplicity of the system.” Magnifique.

And let’s not forget the mean kids at uncov, who decided to rip us a new one because we didn’t, among other things develop software that revolutionizes text formatting on the web. My cofounder Phil pointed out having people either love or hate us is a good thing because it means that we’re not in the “zone of mediocrity.”

In fact, we got enough press hits that we’ve been on a few barometers of Web 2.0 popularity, as seen here: Techmeme (on front page), del.icio.us (we were up to #3 on del.icio.us/popular) and go2web20.com.

So what’s next? Right now we’re polishing what we have out there. We’re also planning more features so let us know if you want anything!

April 11, 2007

Writewith: who, what, why, when, where and how?

Most of Writewith got built in the last 6 weeks, but it’s been a few years in coming.

One of us cofounders, Martin Goldman, started out wanting to solve a big problem — the student newspaper at SUNY Binghamton, Pipe Dream, would sometimes accidentally publish the wrong versions of articles. At the end of a hard night at the copy desks, editors would lose track of which Word document drafts on their computer desktops were the final drafts.

Martin was a computer science major, he just happens to passionately hate stuff like improper punctuation and grammar. So he went into the newsroom and built the staff a system where they could write and edit stories and coordinate their responsibilities all in one place. It worked so well that beyond solving the “wrong-version-got-published” problem, it helped the entire organization work together better. Then he started wondering if other college papers had the same needs.

Around the same time, I was the student business manager at The Stanford Daily. Like Pipe Dream — and most other college papers, as I discovered — our newsroom emailed drafts of stories between staffers, kept track of assignments on a whiteboard in the office, etc…. I had just spent a couple years as a reporter and an editor at the paper, so I was personally inspired to purchase something to stop the pain. After a lot of looking, it became clear to me that the companies building collaboration software for groups did not offer anything cheap and easy for us to use.

There was a hole in the market. Martin started getting other college papers interested in his system. I started thinking that once I finished my job at The Daily (it’s a one-year position), I should go and start a company to try and solve the problem.

To make a long story short, Martin then got a job on the tech side of a major Wall Street bank. Meanwhile, I convinced my childhood friend and genius, Phil Kast, to start a company with me. A short while later, I finally met Martin peddling his wares at a college media convention (not part of his day job) and we joined forces. Phil and I took on side projects to pay the bills while we looked for funding so we could all work full-time.

Note: there are more details about this period that I’ll talk about in later posts. (Like how I tried to start the company as a nonprofit, called Unimedia, where we would use our software to connect student reporters across newsrooms, and so break big stories and become a next-generation Associated Press. Yeah, I’ll leave that stuff for later.)

After initially raising a little money — as the attempted non-profit — from The Stanford Daily, the Associated Collegiate Press and the California College Media Association, we eventually got funding — as a for-profit — from the Canadian University Press, friends and family, and Y Combinator. Turns out that getting nonprofit funding generally requires strong connections to wealthy benefactors, which we didn’t have; turns out that investors in tech startups want to see a chance of a big monetary win in return for taking such a big risk. Lessons learned.

We took the money and iterated on Martin’s system (and we got him to quit his Wall Street job). Over the last few months we did a private beta with 15 or so college papers around the US and Canada. It has been going well… but about 6 weeks ago, we were like “you know, now that we see which features work and don’t work for all these different sizes and types of papers. Maybe the features that do work would be useful for all sorts of groups that need to write together.”

So we built.

(And yes, I wrote this blog post in Writewith and published it from there to here.)