Well if they can get rid of the $200+ textbooks that you have to buy (and never use) to get web access that would be great. Almost all material in school textbooks can be found online for free, it really makes no sense to require students to spend anything of $20 on coursebooks.
Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
51–60 of 165 posts
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#52They need to publish traditional textbooks as well if they are going to compete. Maybe with images and QR codes for the parts where video adds something to the text. If they don't then they will be Just Another Multimedia Learning Company.
It would be neat if they offered some free textbooks and course materials for certain subjects.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#53I previously worked with their VP Engineering, at Janna Systems. A very, very sharp guy who's been through a couple of startups and exits.
I've heard from a different friend that they're very results oriented w.r.t estimates, etc. It means that they get a lot of stuff done, but there's no time for research or non-approved exploration.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#54Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously? Not every project can be in a public repo, are all their projects on open repos? Some of us host our own or use different sites because we've been using git longer than github. Also, love the "web". It's called the Internet, are you a tech CEO or not? I love how critical they are because you didn't conform to their specific idea of how coders share their code and communicate. Someone can be pro open source…
I agree it's ridiculous to get to be turned down for that reason at that point. If that was their attitude, they could at least be efficient about it for their own sake and out candidates. But, in general, I think you should consider the other side of the argument. The "problem" is that people without public profiles are competing with people with. And if you're looking at candidates and someone has code online that…
It's one thing to prioritize a candidate with a public profile over one without when determining the order in which to interview candidates.
But to reject a candidate, after he's interviewed by the CEO (so this would presumably be the last interview stage), because he doesn't have "enough" public projects and therefore doesn't "love the web" enough? I think that's stupid.
Edit: misread the parent, we are actually saying the same thing.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
The market is definitely strange in Toronto. Did the #2 type companies offer any equity at all?
They all do. the first ones offer anywhere between 30% (if you are a co-founder), 15% - 1% (if you are in the first 10 to get hired). The 2nd type offer equity (generally less than 1%) and in all honesty it's pointless - chances are they'll fail before your 4 yr vesting period (and if you work for 12 hrs/day everyday you'll probably get burnt out even before you hit your year 4). And even if they don't fail, if you d…
Totally agree with you. Only in the rare case like Shopify, the stock option will give you a meaningful return.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#56As a developer in the Toronto area, I suspect I would be working for Top Hat if their recruiters were better. I've had two or three interactions with them and each time they completely dropped the ball. Extra funding is great, but if they can't hire, they can't use it.
+1 to the reputation of Top Hat amongst Toronto devs. Everyone I know is avoiding the place like the plague. Regardless of the salaries touted on places like StackOverflow Jobs.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#57As a developer in the Toronto area, I suspect I would be working for Top Hat if their recruiters were better. I've had two or three interactions with them and each time they completely dropped the ball. Extra funding is great, but if they can't hire, they can't use it.
what are some of the other more interesting companies/startups in Toronto?
Games:
* Ubisoft
* Rockstar Toronto
* UKen
* Big Viking Games
* Gameloft
* Torn Banner Studios
* Get Set Games
* Drinkbox Studios
* Capybara Games
* Sago Sago
* Metanet Software
* Zynga Toronto
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#58Earlier quoted context omitted.
Maybe not the suggestion you're looking for, but I'll take the opportunity to vent. First and foremost, don't arbitrarily block Linux users for web interfaces. McGraw Hill does, or did in the past and so do others. I spent hours contacting their useless support and playing politics with the college to get this changed, to no avail. At first, I could simply change my useragent and sneak in, with everything working wel…
Funny, physical textbooks have never blocked me from using Linux, nor has physical paper coursework...
Exactly.
>Even as the big publishers work to increase the proportion of sales that come from digital products, they’re still largely dependent on physical books.
The other issue the large sum of money they want to charge per book. The cost of the books is so high that it is propping up "physical book" market. Mostly because publishers have offered no way to resell your digital or ebook. Lots of students buy used text books, and students that buy new often sell their books to recover some of the cost when they complete the class. The publishers see digital books as a way to prevent students from doing this so that everyone has to buy new (at the ridiculously high prices). The students are going to do what is economical for them, until the prices either drop significantly, or you offer an online marketplace where students can sell/trade digital books then physical college text book industry will be here to stay.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
Seriously? Not every project can be in a public repo, are all their projects on open repos? Some of us host our own or use different sites because we've been using git longer than github. Also, love the "web". It's called the Internet, are you a tech CEO or not? I love how critical they are because you didn't conform to their specific idea of how coders share their code and communicate. Someone can be pro open source…
I agree it's ridiculous to get to be turned down for that reason at that point. If that was their attitude, they could at least be efficient about it for their own sake and out candidates. But, in general, I think you should consider the other side of the argument. The "problem" is that people without public profiles are competing with people with. And if you're looking at candidates and someone has code online that…
I don't think it's reasonable at all unless you equally weigh other sources of evaluating coding ability. IMO it's the same as assuming all managerial applicants also have volunteer charity experience as a manager that they can document and show. Very few careers hinge on what you do in your spare time as long as that spare time isn't spent being a criminal.
edit: hell, it's also already a norm that you have to perform a pro-bono coding assignment as part of the interview process. It's ridiculous to expect an extensive spare-time open source effort plus 2-10 hours of free work for an interview.
Re: Top Hat Raises $22M to Go After Pearson, McGraw-Hill
#60Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree it's ridiculous to get to be turned down for that reason at that point. If that was their attitude, they could at least be efficient about it for their own sake and out candidates. But, in general, I think you should consider the other side of the argument. The "problem" is that people without public profiles are competing with people with. And if you're looking at candidates and someone has code online that…
It's one thing to prioritize a candidate with a public profile over one without when determining the order in which to interview candidates. But to reject a candidate, after he's interviewed by the CEO (so this would presumably be the last interview stage), because he doesn't have "enough" public projects and therefore doesn't "love the web" enough? I think that's stupid. Edit: misread the parent, we are actually say…
which is what I said.